Director/activist Michael Moore dissected President Obama's problems in Washington and offered advice on how to win back voters in 2012. He was on the set with Lawrence last night, and he delivered a warning message to the president: get it together or you'll be out of a job.
"Here's what [Obama] doesn't get: when your opponent states clearly that our number one job in the next two years is to make sure you don't have a second term, our number one job is to defeat you and to embarrass you, you don't respond with kumbaya, let's hold hands," said Moore.
"He doesn't understand is that they are going to go after him relentlessly. And they're going to call him a socialist or a Kenyan or a tribesman. If he responds weakly, like a weakling, they won't be calling him Mr. President any more. He's going to be unemployed in 2012."
Moore also advised Democrats to "get some gumption."
Leave a Comment:
Once again,we lose a fighter for the people,and WE THE PEOPLE are the poorer for it. Alan may no have always been polite,or even nice,but that was the right approach. As a fellow Floridian,I am shocked by my fellow citizens voted in a fashion that may set the state back a few years,which is sad. Alan is right,we compromised away with a bunch of douchbags that want only power wealth. Alan Grayson was what a Democrat should be, damn the compromise.
You live in Florida, too? How in the hell did Rick Scott get elected? I think they're still messing with the voting machines.
Here's the point I think folks like Moore and company keep missing. There is no way to get a win-win out of the PRESIDENT standing up in front of a group of reporters and playing the thug. Sure, it may give Democrats a second or two of visceral satisfaction, but then it also undermines the President as a LEADER in that SOMEBODY has to be the adult in the room.
Besides, the President hasn't been the problem. President Obama isn't stupid or clueless. He KNOWS what the GOP is saying. Yet he cannot be the one to say screw you and call it a day. Don't you understand? HE can't be the one who disrespects the idea of an actual legislative process. Besides, what good does it do for the President to pretend that we're now in a stronger position than before? "Convictions" don't matter for sh*t if we don't have the votes to get anything done.
So no, Michael Moore. Asking the President to act the bully is not the solution. Getting the REST OF THE PARTY to "get some gumption" is.
Healthcare reform wasn't attacked because President OBAMA didn't boldly stand up for it. For crying out loud, the man took on a whole room of Republican critics singlehandedly and came out on top. Without cussing or stomping his feet even once. No, healthcare reform was attacked relentlessly because NO ONE ELSE of consequence consistently stood up for it! While folks like Alan Grayson and Anthony Weiner did a fine job, where was the Senate? Thus, the GO/TP were easily able to overwhelm and drown out President Obama's defense of such legislation.
Because no matter how big a "star" the President is, his cannot be the only voice in the room all the time. Which is why I want to throw something at the TV every time I hear Democrats now whine about having done things that they didn't get credit for. Because it sure would have been nice to have seen them boldly TAKING credit for something every once in a while.
Instead, most were content to sit back silently while the GOP framed talking points to attack their policies. They were content to hide behind President Obama's lapels while the President bore the brunt of the GOP criticism for policies that THEY passed. Heck, some of them practically APOLOGIZED for having dared to pass Democratic bills.
Adam Green was right. If OUR OWN representatives aren't willing to stand up and fight for their own agenda, they have no business expecting the base to stand up and fight for THEM!
Okay @Michael Moore,
You want to start a fourth party? Let's start with a name. I think the group already exists. We used to be called the "Democratic Base" then they called us "Obama Democrats", now they call us "Progressives".
We are the people who threw our weight behind Bill Halter in Ark because we think Blue Dog's suck. We want a public health care option, we want STRONG wall street reform, a fair/progressive tax system, more effective stimulus (call it INVESTMENT not SPENDING) stimulus spending. We want leadership who wasn't afraid to stand up for what they claimed to believed in. The democratic party has completely failed in this regard. And though I personally voted because I follow politics and am terrified of the "other side", I know many of my peers didn't see the point (they're not as plugged in as I).
It's time our group was heard outside of the confines of liberal media. Let's go mainstream!
It all starts with a name.
The fourth party needs to be called the Progressives for Wack and Sack...or a variation of hit the ""gopher on the head" progressive movement. Politics are nasty...and one of the replies above is correct...our President needs to be Presidential and show leadership AND be the adult in the room.....HOWEVER...our Senators and Congresspersons need to grows cajones and be the pittbulls for OUR sake. They never pulled out their punching gloves like Alan Grayson did - Florida lost a great leader there....hopefully, we'll see him on MSNBC soon!
Middle America Reform Party
The middle America reform party offers a new paradigm in American politics. “The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.” This translates politically to ”The needs of middle America outweigh the needs of the few”.
Middle America:
Middle America is the foundation, vessel, protector, and defender of America. Middle America is the fundamental source of all American liberty, freedom, and equality. Middle America made America, defends America, and preserves liberties, freedoms, and equality.
There are no democrats or republicans, liberals or conservatives, red or blue. There is only middle America and two significant extreme fringes, the radical desperate poor and the radical wealthy elite.
Middle America’s two radical fringe are a curse and a blessing. Cauldrons of wealthy elite and desperate poor spur imagination, creativity, initiative, and progress. These same cauldrons produce tyranny, exploitation, liability, and burden.
Middle America must tend both desperate poor and wealthy elite extremes for simple survival and progress. The extreme desperate poor will always require social programs, social security, medicare, unemployment compensation, and etc. The extreme wealthy elite will always require taxation, regulation, and oversight. Tending two radical extremes is the fate of middle America. The payoff is liberty, freedom, and equality for more Americans.
The extremes:
The core of the wealthy elite paradigm is extravagance, personality, and small or absent government. The core of desperate poor paradigm is suffering, personality, and large all-serving government. Either paradigm, in extreme, destroys and dismantles middle America.
Middle America must differentiate and define extremes, insulate itself from the associated destructive dangers, and govern. America’s democracy and media must remain objective to wealthy elite or desperate poor paradigms. The dangers of extreme influences include eight elephants: war, immigration, ecology, recession, foreclosure, joblessness, tax, and debt.
Clear definition of wealthy, poor, and middle improves objectivity. Here is a possibility:
Simple definition:
The Obama administration recently defined America’s upper tax bracket above $250,000 (note1) per year income. The federal government defines poverty at $22,050 (family of 4) (note2). In 2006, the "real" (adjusted for inflation) median annual household income rose 1.3% to $50,233.00. (note3) Herein is a simple definition of wealthy elite, desperate poor, and middle America.
The desperate poor:
“The poverty rate in 2009 (14.3 percent) was the highest poverty rate since 1994… The number of people in poverty in 2009 (43.6 million) is the largest number in the 51 years for which poverty estimates have been published… Between 2008 and 2009, the poverty rate increased for children under the age of 18 (from 19.0 percent to 20.7 percent)
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/about/overview/index.html
The wealthy elite:
“In the United States at the end of 2001, 10% of the population owned 71% of the wealth and the top 1% owned 38%. On the other hand, the bottom 40% owned less than 1% of the nation's wealth. According to this 2006 study by the Federal Reserve System, from 1989 to 2004, the distribution in the United States had been changing with indications there was a greater concentration of wealth held by the top 10% and top 1% of the population.” footnote1
“In addition, wealth is unequally distributed with the wealthiest 25% of US households owning 87% ($54.2 trillion, in 2009) of the wealth in the United States.” footnote2
Conclusion:
Approximately 10% of America is “wealthy elite”. Approximately 14% of America is “desperate poor”. Middle America occupies the middle.
History:
For over a century, as the American population grew, the federal government congressional and executive representation fell further behind the 1776 pace of one representative per 26,000 citizens and one president per 2.4 million. Instead of adding more congressional members or presidents, the congress simply was paid more for the added 21.5 multiple citizen load, now at one congressperson per 573,831 citizens.
Today:
The current salary (2010) for rank-and-file members of the House and Senate is $174,000 per year. (note4) This salary plus one and a half median income of the American population breaks $250,000 income. Our congresspersons play at edge of wealthy elite and very many government representatives easily qualify as wealthy elite.
The president earns a $400,000 annual salary, along with a $50,000 annual expense account, a $100,000 non-taxable travel account and $19,000 for entertainment (note5) The president, with perks, makes over 10 times median American income and 22 times the poverty level family. At median American pay, the federal government could hire 9 presidents for the pay of the existing one president. Presidential income is clearly wealthy elite income.
Conclusion:
At $250,000, large portions of federal representatives are “radicalized” to the wealthy elite. The president and congress are compensated using a corporate (wealthy elite) pay scale paradigm that concentrates power and boosts executive pay.
Under the red/blue, conservative/liberal, democrat/republican political paradigm there is no conflict of interest in today’s federal government. Under the “middle America” paradigm, the entire government is a conflict of interest to middle America.
Does middle America really want wealthy elite radicals running it’s government? It is time middle America face its fate, drop the old paradigms, and take charge of America.
When service in a restaurant suffers, more waiters are required. When fire breaks out everywhere, more fire fighters are required. When crime becomes rampant, more police are required. When democratic power faulters, more congresspersons are required. The antidote to corruption of power is disbursement of power. Step it up, America. Be proactive. Check out plan-b.
Citizen is coach to team democracy. Coach is responsible for success. It’s your call, coach.
http://coach-1640280.newsvine.com/
http://constitutionm2.newsvine.com/
Presidential Candidate (for one of 9 executive branch presidents) 2016
Notes:
http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/10poverty.shtml (1)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2010/08/11/GR2010081106717.html (2)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States (3)
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/uscongress/a/congresspay.htm (4)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_United_States (5)
Sherri is exactly correct. The President has an obligation to his office to remain Presidential at all times.
If the Democrats in Congress are wondering why they lost despite being part of one of the most productive sessions in history, they should look at how timidly (if at all) they defended their record.
The bottom line is that they were afraid to stand with our President and take ownership of what they've accomplished over the past 21 months, so they can no longer initiate legislation.
The American press doesn't come out looking very good, either. Political coverage has been reduced to stories about poll results and analysis and commentary about the conclusions those polls point to - up to and including the day before the election when NBC News and the Wall Street Journal released a new one. The Republicans don't even attempt to tell the truth any more, they just stay "on message."
And the worst part is that people who are supposed to be journalists/truth-tellers let them get away with it. It's gotten to the point where for the first time, a Vice Presidential candidate from a major party didn't appear on "Meet the Press" to explain her record or her position on the issues. Now, they don't even attempt to tell the truth; they simply stay "on message" and hope the voters will be fooled. Guess what? They were.
Thanks a lot, weak Congressional Majority & impotent Fourth Estate - I hope you enjoy covering Congressman Issa's subpoena festival and the impeachment trial of President Obama!
Sherri is exactly correct. The President has an obligation to his office to remain Presidential at all times.
If the Democrats in Congress are wondering why they lost despite being part of one of the most productive sessions in history, they should look at how timidly (if at all) they defended their record.
The bottom line is that they were afraid to stand with our President and take ownership of what they've accomplished over the past 21 months, so they can no longer initiate legislation.
The American press doesn't come out looking very good, either. Political coverage has been reduced to stories about poll results and analysis and commentary about the conclusions those polls point to - up to and including the day before the election when NBC News and the Wall Street Journal released a new one.
And the worst part is that people who are supposed to be journalists/truth-tellers let them get away with it. It's gotten to the point where for the first time, a Vice Presidential candidate from a major party didn't appear on "Meet the Press" to explain her record or her position on the issues. Now, they don't even attempt to tell the truth; they simply stay "on message" and hope the voters will be fooled. Guess what? They were.
Thanks a lot, weak Congressional Majority & impotent Fourth Estate - I hope you enjoy covering Congressman Issa's subpoena festival and the impeachment trial of President Obama!
Where is the link for the Nov 4th Michael Moore interview? I want to put it up as a link. Michael gave great advise for getting our base together.
As a diehard Democrat, I too am frustrated. I don't understand why Republicans appeal to their conservative base, but Democrats feel the need to move to the center and become more like Republicans, leaving their base in the dust. Instead of feeling like I have a choice between a Democrat and a Republican, it feels like I have to choose between a hard core conservative Republican or a moderate Republican. I want my Democratic representative.
Along that note, it frustrates me that Obama continues to try and appeal to Republicans who have no intention in working with him. They want him to FAIL. They are saying it's their number one goal. Stop appealing to them. We watered down the stimulus because of Republicans and they still didn't support it. We watered down health care because or Republicans and they still didn't support it. The list goes on and on. They aren't going to work with him.
And yet, when I hear people talking about how Obama needs to remain Presidential at all times I can kind of cut him some slack. I know he is an incredibly smart man. I am still glad that I voted for him and he has my support. But somewhere there has to be a way to be Presidential and still stand by your ideals and not giving in.
All I know is I am more frustrated now than I have ever been and I wish there was something I could do about it. Any suggestions out there?
I totally agree with what I've read from others. I don't even recognize my own party these last few years. Its as if they only raised their heads long enough for photo ops and once they went into campaign mode(which seemed like about ten seconds after they took office in 2008) they spent the rest of the time trying to take care of numero uno instead of working for the people who sent them to Washington. And the back pedalling and distancing themselves from the decisions made..good Heavens, it was like watching a room ful of little kids saying 'he did it, all his fault' 'don't blame meeee'. Sheesh I grew up with Dem leaders I could respect. Ones that came out swinging for what was best for ALL the people, not bowing to big business time and time again. Even when it looked hopeless at least they tried and kept trying. I kept waiting for heads to roll over the Wall St fisaco, but no, silence after the initial pretended 'outrage'. I waited again for them to stand up for real health care reform and again, I damn near needed a score card to even tell which team was at bat most of the time. I don't know, maybe its asking alot, but if they dont want to 'be' Dems then I just wish they'd stand down and support the bid of some people who really would support the middle and lower class and our Democratic values-while there are any of us left to stand up for.
It is a final straw for me to now also hear the Prez is likely to cave and let the elite tax break continue-after promising he wouldn't...I guess he figures even if he tried to fight it, he'd be fighting it alone. Wanna bet even when they give the monied class everything they ask for, even if they secure still more free rides and loopholes and loose regs(or no regs) we will just keep bleeding jobs and hearing excuses for why they can't invest in America and Americans?
Why change when obstruction and lies got them all they wanted
How many people complaining about what the democrats and Obama didn't do or didn't do fast enough actually volunteered in their community to enable social change? Who of those saying the president should be doing more to get out and excite youth (like Michael Moore) to vote actually went to a college to talk about voting? Who of those complaining that we didn't get a public option even once called their elected officials to voice your opinion? Since Obama was elected, voters sat back and people started waiting for this big change like it was going to rain down from the sky and shower us all with the exact visions we all had in mind about progress in no time at all. We need to put the "we" in yes "we" can. Go do something for your community. start recycling. eat local food. do something other than complain.
Mateo in San Jose,
I'm with you, we need a network of supporters to spread the word to those who do not keep up with recent events. It has to start now.
you said it!
<p>http://barootz.blogspot.com/</p>
I mean you said it!
http://barootz.blogspot.com/
Well if we came up short due to 9 million young voters who failed to show, what does that tell us?
It's tells me, they were not serious with their convictions and failed to grasp the ugly nature of their opponent.
The minions of ditto heads got to them over the course of 2 years time and they became disheartened from constant attacks?