Assimilated into the Oborg


Nekkid Capitolism

It’s bad enough that what passes for the left has been kneecapped by the Obama Administration. The ambiguous campaign promise “Change you can believe in” has turned out to be a Nixon-goes-to-China series of moves to the right that would have been well nigh impossible for a Republican to execute without incurring significant costs. Remarkably, Obama has increased both the number and scope of wars, used deficit scaremongering to cut Medicare and Social Security, and passed a health care “reform” bill that made overly expensive American health care even more uneconomical by enriching Big Pharma and health care insurers. And this is only a starter list in his campaign against average Americans.

Those visible moves have been accompanied by a largely stealth operation to neuter what were once called progressive organizations (“progressive” has been rendered meaningless by being adopted by pretty much everyone to the left of Attila the Hun). Groups truly committed to a left-leaning anti-corporate platform quickly learned the cost of crossing Team Obama: in their so-called veal pen, the Administration would get big company backers to yank their funding. This process has now moved up the food chain, but with bigger groups, it is less clear whether the Administration is the driver or whether like minded operatives are acting on their own initiative. Regardless, there is increasingly a vacuum to the left of Obama, which eases his continuing move to the right, as think tanks that are perceived to be reasonably independent, like the Economic Policy Institute, mysteriously lose the backing of significant, established funders.


There are plenty of people to the left of Obama, but they are mostly all individuals. The lefty advocacy groups (like Code Pink, MoveOn, NOW, NARAL) have been assimilated.

Nobody could have seen this coming. Politico:

Obama’s national finance chairwoman, Chicago hotel mogul Penny Pritzker, told supporters at a national finance committee meeting in Indianapolis May 2, and in other conversations, not to give money to the groups, people familiar with her comments said.

“From the beginning of this race Obama has told supporters that if they want to help his effort, they should do so through his campaign,” said Obama spokesman Bill Burton, who confirmed that Pritzker has told donors not to give to the groups. “And he means exactly what he says.”

[…]

But in recent days, major donors have begun to conclude that Obama is serious in trying to cut off funds to the outside groups.

“It’s given donors pause,” said one prominent Democratic donor of Pritzker’s words.

Donors and Democratic activists have been quietly debating Obama’s motives: Is he simply interested in keeping his Democratic efforts within his campaign, which is so well funded he doesn’t need outside help? Or is he, as some believe, cutting off funds to groups whose leaders — Brock and Podesta — some Obama aides view as too tightly linked to Clinton?

In either case, Pritzker’s words are the latest in Obama’s remarkably swift and complete consolidation of Democratic Party power. It’s an unprecedented seizure of control that has built him, over the course of a year, the most powerful field organization and the largest financial network in American politics, leaving many existing structures — traditional party organizations in many states, the Clintons’ long-nurtured national network — in the dust.

That story was from May 15, 2008 – before Obama was even the presumptuous nominee. Obama consolidated his power a long time ago. That’s why I see any primary challenges as nothing but fantasy.



This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

52 Responses to Assimilated into the Oborg

  1. myiq2xu says:

    According to Memeorandum, the #1 story in the nation today is Michele Bachmann’s migraines.

    • Melissa says:

      Totally O/T Could you do me a big favor and either unmoderate my response to AngieNC in the “women don’t vote for women…” thread or else just ban me.

      I love lurking here, but I’ll never delurk again if that’s the kind of reception I get. (No offense Lola at Large, you were very nice)

      • Melissa, I can’t speak for the mods. (More often I speak against them!) But you’ve made some very good posts, imo. And spammy does grab random posts randomly, at random….

        • Melissa says:

          Thanks, I probably shouldn’t have whined about it in this thread, but I don’t know if anyone is looking at the old one. I don’t think I used any profanity, but I’ll admit to a little snippiness. 😉

      • Lola-at-Large says:

        Oh goodness, no offense taken. Just sorry you were upset. 😦

      • angienc says:

        Blog Rule #5

        5. This is the blogosphere, not a hothouse for delicate flowers.

        Maybe the internet isn’t the place for you.

    • ralphb says:

      The only way that disaffected Democrats are going to get DIck out of office is to vote for the GOP challenger.

      Seems to me it’s a no brainer that’s preferable to another term and possibly worse boobery.

    • WMCB says:

      That’s a damn powerful ad. If they could shorten it down to TV length, they should run it in 2012.

      • ralphb says:

        I think it could be easily shortened just by using fewer voices. It may see airtime, especially if there’s a woman nominee.

    • votermom says:

      Noo!!! Those are fake women! 😀

      • WMCB says:

        Yeah, complete tools of the patriarchy right there. Poor things don’t even know their own minds. They need to STFU and stop talking economics and owning businesses and female self-reliance, and get back in line with viewing themselves as dependent on the Democratic Party to carefully portion out their “rights”.

        • votermom says:

          Don’t they know they are just walking uterii who should only vote based on roe?

        • Lola-at-Large says:

          Yeah, ’cause motherhood is icky. /rollseyes

        • JeanLouise says:

          Talk about ad hominem attacks. There’s a gulf the size of the Pacific Ocean between “motherhood is just icky” and the right to plan our own families. Please provide one documented quote from any pro-choice woman who’s claimed anything close to that.

        • WMCB says:

          Please provide one documented quote from any pro-choice woman who’s claimed anything close to that.

          Okay, I’ll bite. Simone de Beauvoir, author of The Second Sex, once said,

          French feminist Simone de Beauvoir’s assertion, in a 1976 interview with Betty Friedan, that “no woman should be authorized to stay at home to raise her children…because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one.”

          Or how about feminist legal scholar Linda Hirshman in the December 2006 American Prospect, who said that women who choose to leave work to have children are leading “lesser lives”.

          boldly assailed the truism that, when it comes to full-time mothering vs. careers, it’s a good thing for women to have a choice.

          Hirshman argued that such choices by elite women are a primary reason for the dearth of women in the corridors of political and economic power. Instead of “reaping feminism’s promise of opportunity,” she wrote, these former lawyers and executives are in the kitchen baking apple pies.

          While Hirshman conceded that those “expensively educated upper-class moms” seemed happy at home, she insisted that “what they do is bad for them [and] is certainly bad for society.”

          http://reason.com/archives/2006/04/01/the-return-of-the-mommy-wars

          Robin Morgan, founder of the feminist group W.I.T.C.H. said,

          “We can’t destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage.”</blockquote

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Feminists

          I could go on. There’s lots. Are these views the views of a majority of pro-choice or left-leaning women? Nah.

          But your assertion that an anti-family, anti-motherhood strain that ridicules and sneers at women who CHOOSE more traditional lives simply does not exist at all in the pro-choice feminist left community, and that none of them have ever made any statements at all that are “even close to that” is complete bullshit.

        • WMCB says:

          Please provide one documented quote from any pro-choice woman who’s claimed anything close to that.

          Okay, I’ll bite. Simone de Beauvoir, author of The Second Sex, once said,

          French feminist Simone de Beauvoir’s assertion, in a 1976 interview with Betty Friedan, that “no woman should be authorized to stay at home to raise her children…because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one.”

          Or how about feminist legal scholar Linda Hirshman in the December 2006 American Prospect, who said that women who choose to leave work to have children are leading “lesser lives”.

          boldly assailed the truism that, when it comes to full-time mothering vs. careers, it’s a good thing for women to have a choice.

          Hirshman argued that such choices by elite women are a primary reason for the dearth of women in the corridors of political and economic power. Instead of “reaping feminism’s promise of opportunity,” she wrote, these former lawyers and executives are in the kitchen baking apple pies.

          While Hirshman conceded that those “expensively educated upper-class moms” seemed happy at home, she insisted that “what they do is bad for them [and] is certainly bad for society.”

          http://reason.com/archives/2006/04/01/the-return-of-the-mommy-wars

        • WMCB says:

          Robin Morgan, founder of the feminist group W.I.T.C.H. said,

          “We can’t destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage.”

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Feminists

          I could go on. There’s lots. Are these views the views of a majority of pro-choice or left-leaning women? Nah.

          But your assertion that an anti-family, anti-motherhood strain that ridicules and sneers at women who CHOOSE more traditional lives simply does not exist at all in the pro-choice feminist left community, and that none of them have ever made any statements at all that are “even close to that” is complete bullshit.

        • WMCB says:

          Sorry – screwed up closing my quote on that last one. It’s late.

        • Lola-at-Large says:

          BTW, WMCB, thanks for saving me a boatload of time on research. 🙂

      • JeanLouise says:

        Roe is dead. Republican men in individual states are busily choking it off instead of dealing with the economic issues that they were elected to address.

        Republicans, men and women, on the federal level are busily trying to destroy what’s left of our economy.

        • Lola-at-Large says:

          When losing an argument, change the subject. Classic.

        • angienc says:

          Re: Roe — Republican men are “busily choking off” and the Dem men are sitting on their thumbs. Sins by omission may not count in your world, but they do in mine.

          Re: the economy — The Dems have had control of the House & Senate for 6 years prior to their losing the House last November. There has been an alleged Dem in the WH for the last 2 1/2 years. It is time for the Dems to start taking some responsibility for this economy as well.

        • DandyTiger says:

          For the life of me I don’t see the difference between most of these Republicans and Democrats in office. Sure they make lots of different noises, but when it comes down to policy and who they really serve, they seem the same to me.

          So if you’re making blanket statements about one group or the other, it’s probably a tribal thing vs. a policy thing.

          Time to screw with their minds. Shake things up. Vote different.

        • DandyTiger says:

          OK, I officially TM “Vote Different” 🙂

    • westcoaster says:

      they want jobs but not when the democrats come up with a bill for it…
      http://www.examiner.com/top-news-in-boston/scott-brown-breaking-with-gop-over-jobs-bill-enrages-the-right

      • myiq2xu says:

        That’s from last February and quotes commenters from a FOX News website.

        That’s called “nutpicking

        BTW – The ad was from GOP House women – Brown is a Senator (and male)

  2. Lola-at-Large says:

    What’s funny is that with the Citizens United ruling, they need the Clintonian “national network” more than ever. And they killed it. Suckers.

  3. JeanLouise says:

    Hmm, Republicans, male or female, haven’t created very many jobs in the past eleven years.

    I’m including Obama in the above comment since he’s at least as much a Republican as GWB was.

    Any elected official who wants to take milk away from babies and food and medicine away from the elderly and the disabled is not pro-woman.

    We need FDR Democrats to set this country on the road to wellness.

    • 1539days says:

      Reagan was an FDR Democrat.

      • JeanLouise says:

        Reagan was nothing of the sort. He was all about defunding “welfare queens”,deregulating business and busting unions. Reagan was a charming boob. FDR was a charming leader.

        • 1539days says:

          Tell that to Japanese Americans.

          Reagan was an FDR Democrat by virtue of the fact that he actually VOTED FOR FDR 4 times for president.

        • JeanLouise says:

          I would guess that Reagan went with the crowd if he voted for FDR. He certainly betrayed those ideals by the time he was elected president.

    • ralphb says:

      Could you kindly share where this is coming from? I have seen no evidence of this happening at all.

      Any elected official who wants to take milk away from babies and food and medicine away from the elderly and the disabled is not pro-woman.

      • propertius says:

        Ralph,

        Cuts to WIC, Medicare, and Social Security are all part of the proposed spending reductions – that constitutes taking “milk away from babies and food and medicine away from the elderly and the disabled ” in my book.

        • ralphb says:

          Depends on what’s meant by cut actually and if some plan to do things a bit differently comes with it.

          A $500 billion cut was made to Medicare funding to cover part of Obamacare, as well as, money from food stamps etc. That was a simple cut with no reform to it. If they can reform Medicare/Medicaid so that it costs less, then a cut would be fine.

          In any case, cuts in spending have to be made and the choices boil down to priorities in the end. Since poor women and children don’t vote, WIC may be in serious trouble.

        • ralphb says:

          By the way, that’s been the standard Democratic scare tactic in every fucking election since the ’70s. They should get a new one because most of us won’t the old one anymore.

        • JeanLouise says:

          Thank you, propertius. That’s exactly what I was referring to.

          I won’t defend Obamacare because it’s mostly a giveaway to insurance companies and Big Pharma. I will say that the $500 bilion will come from Medicare Advantage which is over and above basic Medicare coverage.

          As to getting a new scare tactic, I don’t consider telling the truth a “tactic”. It’s just telling the truth. Republicans and libertarians don’t think twice about denying poor children milk. I think there’s something fundamentally wrong with people who think that way.

        • Lola-at-Large says:

          Um, it was Obama who put Medicare & Social Security on the table this time, not Republicans.

          And guess what? Republicans and Democrats worked together to protect WIC and Food for Peace (which coincidentally doesn’t feed a single American) from further cuts. http://www.seattlepi.com/national/politico/article/Food-programs-escape-budget-cuts-1426289.php

    • Mary says:

      Odd, that you mention FDR. He was STRONGLY opposed to public employee unions, and would have STRONGLY opposed to what happened in Wisconsin.

      Thought you oughta know.

  4. ralphb says:

    “At this Point, Anyone with an Obama 2012 Bumper Sticker is a Threat to the Gene Pool” – Rep Allen West

  5. DandyTiger says:

    I have no sympathy for the Democratic party or these other organizations that have been assimilated with respect to funding. Obama is a Republican in everything but name, and the powers behind the Democratic party willingly handed over the keys to Obama.

    The Democratic party is dead. These organizations that have been assimilated are dead.

    There can be no primary challenger from a dead party. Period.

  6. Three Wickets says:

    Really does look like the Grand Bargain is the Simpson-Bowles Commission proposal. All the R+D choreography is coming together nicely, looks like we’ll have cat food after all. If I were a Progressive my head would be exploding, but then real Progressives may not exist. This will probably be good for investors, not sure about jobs or the economy.

Comments are closed.