Are you ready for this? Alan Grayson could “save Obama” by running to the left

Or Susan Sarandon.  Or Rachael Maddow.

I kid you not.

Addressing the disillusionment of koolaid drinkers everywhere, Michael Lerner assesses the “problem” with Obama in no uncertain terms:

People who used to say, “Give President Obama more time” when the president was criticized for capitulating to the right, or who argued that Obama must have a plan to turn things around, are now largely depressed and angry. To many liberals and progressives, the president’s unwillingness to veto any measure that includes continued tax relief for billionaires is the last straw, building on a record of spinelessness that includes his escalation of the war in Afghanistan, abandonment of a public option for health-care reform, refusal to prosecute those who tortured in Iraq or lied us into that war, and unwillingness to tax carbon emissions.

Ouch.

The worry?  That “spineless” Obama will lose in ’12.

The prescription?

But there is a real way to save the Obama presidency: by challenging him in the 2012 presidential primaries with a candidate who would unequivocally commit to a well-defined progressive agenda and contrast it with the Obama administration’s policies.

I’m not sure about you, but I find it somewhat delicious to see lefties so disillusioned that the see the Obama administration lacking.  They’re not doing enough to destroy our country.  Lerner continues:

Such a candidacy would be pooh-poohed by the media, but if it gathered enough popular support – as is likely given the level of alienation among many who were the backbone of Obama’s 2008 success – this campaign would pressure Obama toward much more progressive positions and make him a more viable 2012 candidate. Far from weakening his chances for reelection, this kind of progressive primary challenge could save Obama if he moves in the desired direction. And if he holds firm to his current track, he’s a goner anyway.

The only way we can save Obama from himself is to push him further to the left.

Dude.

The party platform (put down your coffee if you haven’t already):

Unequivocally call for an immediate end to the presence of U.S. troops, advisers and private U.S.-based security firms in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan, and replace the “war on terror” with a Global Marshall Plan that roots homeland security in a strategy of generosity and concern for the well-being of everyone on the planet.

If Lerner weren’t a Rabbi, I’d say his favorite Christmas tune is John Lennon’s “Happy Christmas (War Is Over)” abomination that plays continuously on our local station.  But I digress.

More suggestions:

Domestically, call for a massive jobs program;

Translation: a Cuba-esque solution.  Take over the private sector completely and make everyone work for the government.  I guess he missed the fact that Cuba had to lay off workers and told folks to “expect less” from government.

a freeze on mortgage foreclosures;

Of course, so the real estate market will never recover.  Hell, why didn’t he suggest abolishing all private ownership?

a national bank that would offer interest-free loans to those seeking to create or expand small businesses;

You know, because that home-loan stuff has worked out so well.

immediate implementation of the parts of the Obama health-care plan that would benefit ordinary citizens and build support for a health plan for all citizens; dramatically lower prices for drugs that treat critical diseases such as AIDS and cancer; a strong tax on carbon emissions; and immediate prosecution of those government employees involved in torture or cover-ups to justify the invasion of Iraq.

Yawn. Wicked predictable.  But I found this interesting:

This candidate should push for the media to provide free and equal time to all major candidates for national office as well as for constitutional amendments requiring only public financing in elections and, separately, for corporations to prove every five years to a jury of ordinary citizens that they have a satisfactory history of environmental responsibility (much like the Environmental and Social Responsibility Amendment, or ESRA, advocated by the Network of Spiritual Progressives).

I guess he forgot that Obama did much better financially by eschewing public financing.  Oh, well.

The goal: a “new New Deal,” of course.

This policy platform must be matched with a willingness to talk unequivocally about the spiritual and ethical need for a new bottom line – one of love, kindness and generosity. We need a progressive push for a new New Deal, which in the 21st century could be the Caring Society: “Caring for Each Other and the Earth.”

I double dog dare you.  Seriously.  Because Obama moving even further left will only result in the total abandonment by independents.  Please.  The only better result is to run that lefty candidate of your dreams as a third-party uber-leftist thereby splitting the vote between the merely stupid and the utterly foolish.  The Pigford vote would remain with Obama, of course, but the truly crazy who would rather live in the oxymoronic Socialist utopia can have their Alan Grayson or Rachel Maddow dream candidate.   

Related, more Democrat disillusionment: We could have let economy fall and been in the majority for 40 years.   Pundette points out the harsh reality of what the government intervention has wrought.  As Michelle Malkin would say, DLTDHYOTWO.

UPDATE: via Hot Air headlines, Elenor Clift in Newsweek: Why Obama needs to reclaim his convictions. 

Advertisements

3 Responses

  1. it dosen’t matter to the left what anyone else thinks. the majority of americans reject obama’s ideas but they should be implemented anyway. that is why marxists always want a dictatorship.

  2. I was wondering what the new neural path in the socialist/progressive groupthink mind-meld was going to be. You have to admit that the Obama Hope n’ Change frenzy is a hard act to follow.

    This is the best: “replace the “war on terror” with a Global Marshall Plan that roots homeland security in a strategy of generosity and concern for the well-being of everyone on the planet.”

    ROTFLOL!

    That’s how we’ll stop Gate Rape!

    We’ll pay for the “welfare of everyone on the planet.”

    ROTFLOL!

    Earth to Michael Lerner: Even the people who can’t imagine themselves paying taxes–never mind being able to afford to look after their own welfare–are a mite concerned about the economy. The folks who are lobbying to get the rich to “pay” for their welfare might not be too interested in splitting their unemployment checks and food stamps with “everyone on the planet.” Peanut-butter sandwiches aren’t getting any cheaper, you know.

    Let’s take care of “everyone on the planet” ”cause there are no poor folk in Washington, DC. Only Obama could read that speech off the teleprompter.

    • It’s funny but it’s scary, too. I read it last night and cried laughing. This morning it just scared me that folks are seriously that far out there to think that a “strategy of generosity and concern” would keep us safe. He’s not a dove. He’s an ostrich.

      And re splitting the welfare check with the rest of the world–seriously. Folks might have to give up their TVs and air conditioning to be able to do so. Our poor live better than middle class in much of the world. We watched a documentary on North Korea last night. Insane. That young kids are so malnourished that they have cataracts? Cataracts. And go blind from it. Meanwhile we have grad students buying organic salmon at Whole Foods with their food stamps. And food stamp recipients have cable. Free cell phones courtesy Uncle Sam. etc etc etc.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: