November 4, 2010

• Alright, I generally try to be tempered with politics. If it isn't gay rights related and it doesn't involve inane, regressive social policies (keep your abstinance only education out of me and my siblings' schools), I tend to be live and let live. When it comes to economic issues, I admit my own general ignorance and try to listen and learn from anyone. And, as I've said many times before, I hate how politics tears apart people who are otherwise friends and how it causes fighting. I don't want to fight and I don't want to degrade. So, I try to stay tempered.

  The issue? I quite secretly (okay, maybe half secretly) love politics. It's something over the past 3 years or so that I've tried to strengthen. And so, of course, I can't possibly not form an opinion around it (even if said opinion is hesitant and vague).

  Though, admittedly, while the recent election results more than infuriate me, I still offer my congrats to my fellow conservative Americans to their victory. And, were it simply a matter of economic conservatives coming out in droves to vote their opinion, I might reside myself to non-hindering and unoffensive grumbling off in the corner.

  But let's be honest, that's not why the Dem majority got ousted. It was people fed up with the job they perceive Obama to be doing. And, were it often reasonable objections, I – again – might not be so angry at the moment. No matter which way I twist it, high spending will never look appealing to an economic conservative. I understand that's liberal economics (well, technically conservative, but I'm not talking liberal economics in the classical, laissez-faire sense, clearly). However, to complain that Obama is the worst president ever??? As I said some post before – I've ceased to have any intellectual respect for you (also, if you really think the Nazis were proper socialism in any sense of the term, please shoot yourself. They hated the communists, too; stop twisting history to fit your agenda. There, Godwin's law, I thought I'd get it out on the table). 

  So, this is not aimed at conservatives. This is to my liberal brothers and sisters who have said that Obama has not done enough or anything at all. This is not a debate of whether conservative or liberal policy is better. This is purely from a liberal standpoint (whether it's good or bad, I have to admit – cut me and I bleed blue).

  As I've said countless times on here, I didn't like Obama at first. He seemed to be another Clinton – "I'll say whatever it takes to get elected." Well, I was partially right. Obama is pure politics and, to somewhat of a degree, he knows how to work politics. The difference between him and Clinton? Obama actually works it to get the policies he promised done.

   

  I keep hearing, "What has Obama done, what has he done?"

  How about financial reform requiring lenders to verify applicants' credit history, income, and employment status, allowing shareholders of publicly traded companies to actually vote on executive pay, and prohibiting banks from engaging in proprietary trading?

  The elephant in the room (no, not that elephant) but I'll say it anyway - fucking government public health care!!! (okay, not really. But damn well closer to the ideal thing) Ever since my economics teacher in Junior year of high school was completely baffled that Canada had perfectly functioning public health care and we didn't, I've been in total support. I mean, progressives have been wanting this since Teddy. Obama did it.

  What does that really mean? Extending health coverage to 32 million uninsured Americans, for one. It also cuts prescription drug cost for those on medicare by 50%. I'm partially parroting, but it also means, starting in 2014, insurance giants will be banned from denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions and from imposing annual caps on benefit payouts. Which, of course, also means not having to wait until they near death and then using government funds to save those in the ER who are uninsured. "As of September, insurance companies can no longer arbitrarily revoke coverage for those who get sick. Children with existing illnesses can no longer be denied insurance. Younger Americans can stay on their parents' policies until they're 26. And 1 million elderly citizens are receiving checks for $250 to fill the gap in Medicare's coverage of prescription drugs." And? Accomplishing "all this while extending the solvency of Medicare by a dozen years and cutting the deficit by $143 billion over the next decade."

  Yes, we didn't get the public option. In fact, Obama used that as a bargaining chip so that, when the bill was whittled down for compromise, we'd still have something to rejoice over. Harsh? Yes. But – we still got it!! Remember how hard a battle (even WITH an f-ing Democratic majority in both chambers!) it was? As a friend of mine had said, Clinton would have taken some sort of compromise rather than fighting for it.

  What else?

  Providing $12.2 Billion in new funding for Individuals With Disabilities Education Act?

  Hell, he's also supported getting the Matthew Shepard act passed and extended benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees for his administration. He's also given more coverage and voice to the gay, bi, and Trans community than it's received from just about any president since Clinton (and we all remember how that turned out, don't we?). Hell, the man's appointed more openly gay officials than any other president in US history – and a transgender woman ('bout time the Trans community got more public, official attention; it's still small steps (did my pathetic hyphen and specificity not tip you off?)...but they're big and necessary steps).

  Should I get started on the stimulus plan? No, I won't even. I'll just highlight how he saved the auto industry from tanking. Some say he should have let them go bankrupt – because apparently the part builders and dealerships that would undoubtedly have suffered on top of just GM and Chrysler and have resulted in the loss of more than 1 million jobs isn't all that big of deal. Maybe I'm just a bit biased, being from Illinois and all (and, therefore, in the midwest), but I'm pretty sure my parents really appreciate that. Sure, admittedly, I don't like active use in the government. I actually do believe in as much limited government as is reasonable (so, no, public health care is not stricken from my list). Basically, create the rules (read: laws) and then let it function on its own. Taking active role smacks a little too much of king (though, keep in mind, congress can always refuse; checks and balances for a reason). However, this was a crisis. No one seemed to mind Bush making special rules in light of a crisis. Of course, I'd love to hear what people would say about Obama handling the economy had he just let it run its course and let the auto industry just fail. All in all, I'll take the bailout rather than not.

  Now, again, I don't want to turn this into liberal vs. conservative. However, Bush was our president for 8 years (though, in fairness to my conservative friends, I generally hesitate to ever call Bush an economic conservative, though a social one he often was (even if just to get votes: gay marriage, anyone?); spending as much as he did on Iraq is not fiscal conservatism and we all know it). So, I say this just to put things in perspective: in 2010 alone, more jobs were created in the private sector than in all 8 years under Bush. Honestly, take a look at some of the charts and the info. in the article. It's absolutely amazing what's been going on economically.

  I really hesitate to throw in voluntary disclosure of White House visitors for the first time in US history as a show of transparency seeing as it was backroom deals that got us most of our progressive achievements. That's fair criticism.

  I also hesitate to mention that he appointed the first Latina supreme court judge (I was raised in the suburbs – I see the world in a colorblind fashion, even if I know enough about race politics to know we cannot do that quite yet), but it really is important.

  I could also add to the list eliminating subsidies to private lender middlemen of student loans and protecting student borrowers.

  For those Teddy fans out there, he's also increased funding for national parks and forests by 10%.

  Fan of world peace (I say that only half sarcastically)? He signed a new START Treaty, a nuclear arms reduction pact with Russia.

  I'm not the biggest enviromentalist nut, but one I was personally thrilled about: increased average fuel economy standards from 27.5 mpg to 35.5 mpg, starting in 2016.

  Extremely passionate patriot? Now the Pentagon provides travel expenses to families of fallen soldiers to be on hand when the body arrives at Dover Air Force Base.

  Need something to go with the last point I made? He's reversed the policy of barring media coverage during the return of fallen soldiers to Dover Air Force Base.

  Also repealed Bush era restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research (oh, thank God, yes).

  Dislike torture? He ended the Bush administration's CIA program of "enhanced interrogation methods" by requiring that the Army field manual be used as the guide for terrorism interrogations.

  Alright, fine, don't like taxes? Tax cuts for up to 3.5 million small businesses to help pay for employee health care coverage.

  And, while on taxes, could we end the complaints about them? Yes, no one likes taxes - but they pay for the services that your government provides. The reason why my public high school was so damn good was because of the taxes paid. Failed public schools? Not when you actually don't try to cut the system.

  And, really, the list could go on. Seriously, way on.

  Now, of course, I'm not entirely pleased. While I might be able to swallow creating a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, making the Tobacco industry susceptible to the FDA smacks a little too much of too much big government and government intervention for me (this libertarian streak in me is hardly surprising, seeing as social liberalism meets economic conservatism by virtue of a belief in a non-intrusive government; and the ability for every individual to choose their own course in any manner they choose so long as it doesn't infringe on anyone else is core to my being).

  And, have we gone over the offenses he's done to gay rights? His administration releasing a defense for Prop. 8. The removal of our large category of civil rights on the website early in his presidency. Promising us a gay marching band to make up for the lack of a gay speaker at his innaugeration. Not doing more to end Don't Ask Don't Tell and currently asking for a stay on the immediate cease that was declared for DADT by a federal judge? Offensive is barely the words I could muster.

  However, much like I've always suspected that his whole "I believe in civil unions, though not gay marriage" thing was a political ploy (however, seeing how much everyone seems to hate him at the moment, he might as well go for broke since he's playing politics severely wrong), I suppose so is his hesitance on gay issues. He's not the open president we expected.

  However, he is the progressive president we wanted. I was hesitant before. While I was, admittedly, incredibly impressed by his campaign and the image that was being crafted and will likely survive in history (as a PR person and an activist, I tend to look for these things; it also explains why I have an absolute love for memorials), I was not impressed by the man. I thought he wasn't doing anything. I can now say that I can place him in that great line with FDR (and when I say that, you know I'm meaning buisness). He doesn't have the openness that's made me an Adlai E. Stevenson man even though I never saw the man alive (then again, Adlai didn't win election twice, if we remember), but he's done more for progressives than has been done in a while.

  I've complained for the past 10 years that politics is a sham and that, while my party fits just about every issue that I would ideally want covered, they don't actually stick to those issues. Obama has. For the first time I'm able to say, he's the president we've been waiting for.

  Honestly, get off the man's back. He's done more in two years than many Democratic presidents have done in 8.

  • 9:43 pm
  • Comments Off