(It wouldn't be me, otherwise).

"get over our various hatreds of one another" is, IMHO, empty calories at best. It's so easy and disempowering to diminish strong opinions and good memories, no matter how intellectually honest, as "hate." Doing so, creates the same don't-harsh-the-mellow conditions that fosters the Beltway's post-partisan clusterfuck.

That quibble aside, I'm thrilled to see you alive and shrilling!

that's my only question.

having spent the last 8 years, truly and unconstructively "hating" republicans, i can attest: nothing.

hate accomplishes very little except destruction. hating on the left = destroying the left. and often = profitting the right. am i wrong?

your ball. /luv back at you, dear/

Even before the election, I started caring much more about the bailout and economy and the deteriorating condition in Afghanistan/Pakistan. Because right now with the way things are heading we're fucked foreign and domestically. I don't understand the "wait and see" attitude. If there's no pushback now, especially on the bailout, then we're going to be much worse off January 20th than we are now. And that presumes the Democrats want to do the right thing (which I doubt and have seen no evidence of that in recent months). Things are deteriorating daily. We need to be pushing to stop the deterioration. I don't think simply writing/calling is going to do it (which is not a reason not to try, I intend to). Hell, most people hated the bailout, told Congress so, and it was a slight bump in the road at best.

I wish I had some other ideas about what could be done to pushback. Because there really should be people in the streets over this wholesale sacking of the Treasury. The "learned helplessness" of the American people, fed for thirty years by right-wing talking points and a propagandist media, is working against us. How to overcome that, I have no idea, but I'd love to hear some suggestions.

Step one is to stop hating the lawyers.
Not all of the lawyers, but the ones who could help with the process of undoing deregulation; the ones who are helping with investigating how to stop Prop H8 in California; and the ones who are working behind the scenes to bring us Fitzmas.

Step two is to stop hating the long view (and as an aside to stop blaming unions).
What happened was not that labor priced itself out of the markets; what happened was that, with the help of Reaganomics and the PATCO destruction, the "ownership society" evaded labor and regulation -- from OSHA to the EPA to the FDA. We had a pro-business (as opposed to pro-american jobs) culture in power starting during the Carter administration. It's still there. It's still driving the "quarterly profit statement" mentality on which the giant boondoggle that is Wall Street depends.
The "safety net" we've been taught to despise and despair of isn't just Social Security and Medicare (Harry and Louise ads, no matter what vintage, notwithstanding). It's curbs on the excess of greed in any form.

Pushback starts here, with us -- before another sundown.

If there's enough money to fund preserving Hank Paulson's golf buddies' comfort zone, if there's enough money to fund wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and contemplate one in Iran, there's damn sure enough money for Universal Health Care -- not insurance ("just because you have insurance doesn't mean you're covered. That's Allstate's stand. Are you in good hands?") because taking care of people costs less than a bureaucracy dedicated to denying care.

There's enough money to pay teachers and repair schools.
There's enough money to inspect and repair bridges.
There's plenty of money to hire and train inspectors for packing houses.
The money's there. It just wants shifting out of the priorities of the GOP, the Beltway and the Village.

We can admit that we’re killers … but we’re not going to kill today. That’s all it takes! Knowing that we’re not going to kill today! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0
1 John 4:18

of policy discussion will do exactly the opposite of what you claim.

Popularity and the support that goes with it is still power, try as the Obama minions might to make her irrelevant. If Clinton says the solution to the mortgage crisis is HOLC, I'm going to give that long hard consideration, and throw the little bit of support I have that matters behind it if it's the right thing. She still has a mighty big pulpit, and supporting her helps magnify her message.

Blowing off the contribution PB1.0 made to the long kiss goodnight to a decent system of political discourse and playing nice-nice is not an answer. My disregard of the blogger boyz is not just in the substance of what they push, but their methodology. Bullying, smearing, bad reasoning, and whipping up hate and resentment at false targets is bad for us all, regardless whether what they're peddling today is the 'right' thing. The rush to amnesia doesn't help.

And insisting on framing any dissent or questioning as 'hate' is misleading and counterproductive. There are plenty of other avenues for supporting liberal policies without contributing to or rewarding the blogger kidz corrupt methodology.

It's not just those who forget history who are forced to relive it, but those who fail to understand it. Hitting at those who are still trying to sort out the how and the why of PB1.0's wrong turn, and inject some caution into the discourse before we all get fooled again only makes it more likely it will all happen again, and labeling it 'hate' and other invalidating characterizations just serves to shut people up, not win their support for the political direction we'd all like to see.

the very fine line dividing them is rationality. We are faced with a fait accompli, folks. Obama won.

We have, as I see it, two choices now: continue to work for a better future for all Americans, or go the LGF/Freeper route, and seethe ceaselessly away in venom and bile.

That doesn't put out any fires or clean up any messes. That just looks immature and invites ridicule -- and eventually marginalizes the seething.

Struck me this morning, listening to discussion on WNYC. AP reporter and substitute host were discussing how secretive the Obama transition has been and that Obama has almost disappeared from public view and hearing. He was visible for the visit with the Bushes and for, iirc, a very brief press conference/appearance.

The AP reporter said she was too young to remember how the Bush I to Clinton transition was handled (and, seemingly, had not researched it), and since the Clinton to Bush II transition was shortened by the FL recount, she had no idea what was usual. OK!!!

Clinton was pretty accessible, iirc. Weren't there ways for the public to make suggestions? He made statements, talked about his proposals to be implemented, and held the Economic Round Table with lots of business people and economists opposed to his plans, along with supporters. He wowed them and the press. (That was some of his last really glowing MCM coverage, as the honeymoon lasted from about the start of his inaugural address to the finish.)

The AP reporter said she had gathered that Obama makes it clear to people he talks to about possible appointments that he knows more about their area of expertise than they do. Kind of strange comment, no? Seemingly without malice, but somehow not reflecting all that well on the president-elect. Strange comment.

But, my question still is--HOW do WE make an impression on Obama?

Esther Fuchs of Columbia University was on later and said Obama tends to take his base for granted--no need to pay much attention to urban dwellers, the poor, intellectuals, liberals--where else to they have to go? So, he seems to want to reach out to those who don't support him. She hoped this would not negatively affect his actions as president.... Oh, dear.

What will Obama do and how will he do it.

And what can we do to influence that?

(2nd try to post)

one word: Pain.

i tend to agree with analysis that obama is an egoist, and like bush, wants to be loved and worshipped unquestioningly. however, Obama does not have a compliant media, dozens of billionaires willing to produce media product to cloak him and his views in a pleasing glaze, and has the disadvantage of being a 'scary black muslim' in the eyes of a large number of americans. so if we progressives kick him in the balls enough, he'll feel it. he's not protected like bush is/was.

like HRC did at the beginning of her campaign (imho) he's taking a lot for granted, and riding high of a cresting wave of positive expectation. but that's not going to last, and like Bill Clinton, he's not going to get much of a honeymoon. the republicans already understand: all they have to do is obstruct, and otherwise not much else, and point fingers. "see, we told you so" will likely be their line for the next four years. Obama is dealing with Epic Proportion Crisis, and so even if he were a Perfected Human, it would be hard for him to "fix" many of the problems we all face. so, he's going to need cover, and support, from the very base he's currently ignoring, very soon.

furthermore, he's insulated, like most Villagers, by a comforting layer of lower order Villagers, and right now isn't hearing from people like us. but that can and will change. if for no other reason than many Villagers are the very definition of 'fair weather friends,' and as soon as riding the obama wave isn't so good for their careers, i expect many of them to desert.

frankly, i should've written this post to be less about Obama, and more about the dems in general. Obama had some coattails, but nothing record breaking. it may in fact be easier to start screaming at our reps, and supporting with real vocality and enthusiasm, those dems who aren't so timid and/or owned by bankers and corporations that they are willing to propose what will actually make a difference. waxman, lee, slaughter, feingold, and some others have made the right noises of late. like i said, i'm a bit behind on my political blogging, but i bet if i checked around, i could find a nice list of progressive leaning congresscritters who are now emboldened by having a dem pres along with a stronger dem majority. i'm already getting not a small amount of chatter from some of their people that "now is the time for new thinking" and "this is the perfect time for progressive solutions that seemed impossible just a short time ago."

it's much easier to primary challenge a set of bluedogs and significantly highlight and support a handful of progressives, than take down a preznit. perhaps that should be our focus. i'm open minded about strategy. other than being sure: silence = death, and constructive critique is more valuable than "you suck, mutherfucker! i hate you!"

Though I do think that there's a big spectrum of choices between "I hate you" and "constructive critique."

From now on, no more Mr. Nice Guy!

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi