Obama Betrays Us, Of Course

by: Matt Stoller

Thu Sep 20, 2007 at 14:53


In Dante's Inferno, the Opportunists were "the people who refused to take sides on the whole good vs. evil thing, but just looked after themselves. As a result, they're doomed to forever run after a banner while being stung by wasps and hornets... These people aren't technically in hell. They're not evil enough to be in hell, so they're in the vestibule of hell."

Obama didn't take a vote on the Moveon condemnation, but an hour earlier he voted for the Boxer amendment.

What a sad spectacle of a politician. 

UPDATE: Apparently his public schedule had him traveling to a rally at that time.  Whatever.  I really appreciated his inspiring leadership this whole episode.

UPDATE AGAIN: Obama had canceled his public schedule to vote in the Senate.

***Due to crucial votes in the Senate concerning the on-going War in Iraq, Senator Obama has had to postpone tomorrow's planned  Rock Hill Town Hall Meeting.***

On a personal level, the Senator wanted us to relay his sincere regret for having to postpone this town hall event in such an important part of the Palmetto State, but, knowing how crucial today's vote on the war in Iraq is to the future of the country, he knew South Carolinians would understand.

The campaign will be rescheduling the Senator's planned town hall in Rock Hill as soon as possible. However, until then, South Carolinians should rest assured knowing that, while Barack may not be able to join us tomorrow in SC, he's doing so only to play his role in ending the war he's opposed since before it began.

What a putz.
Matt Stoller :: Obama Betrays Us, Of Course

Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Obama Betrays Us, Of Course | 51 comments
He left immediately for Atlanta... (0.00 / 0)
Calm down.  He left for a rally in Atlanta immediately after the Boxer vote.  You can keep your vicious hate for Obama and you bile for another day.
The Darth Cheney / Richard Nixon Thing (4.00 / 2)
I get, I really, really do.

Obama couldn't stay and cast his vote against McCarthyism because he had "other priorities."

Thanks to him for making things "perfectly clear."

"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"

[ Parent ]
he's free (0.00 / 0)
at any time to tell us how he would've voted if he hadn't had a prior engagement.
[ Parent ]
how's now? (4.00 / 1)
"The focus of the United States Senate should be on ending this war, not on criticizing newspaper advertisements. This amendment was a stunt designed only to score cheap political points while what we should be doing is focusing on the deadly serious challenge we face in Iraq.  It's precisely this kind of political game-playing that makes most Americans cynical about Washington's ability to solve America's problems.  By not casting a vote, I registered my protest against this empty politics.  I registered my views on the ad itself the day it appeared.

"All of us respect the service of General Petraeus and all of our brave men and women in uniform. The way to honor that service is to give them a mission that is responsible, not to vote on amendments like the Cornyn amendment while we continue to pursue the wrong policy in Iraq."

[ Parent ]
Obama Feeding Frenzy out of control (4.00 / 4)
Put this in perspective.  Perhaps Obama "betrayed" a small portion of the anti-war left for whom the moveon vote was the big one... but that is a very small portion of the American electorate.  And yes, it's dumb politics. 

It's not, ahem, a vote against McCartyhism.  It's a stupid symbolic vote.

But the anti-Obama venom from Stoller is getting old and offensive.  And I don't think it's getting through to anyone who hasn't already joined the Anyone-but-Obama camp.  It seems that there is something deeper about Obama that Stoller really hates -- perhaps that he won't stand in line and battle for the netroot's chosen causes like a loyal soldier, perhaps his direct hit on cynicism.  Anyway, it's tiresome.  Stoller has hinted at the reasons for his bile -- that Obama is "not one of us," that he's an opportunist, but at least one of those adjectives can describe every candidate in this race.  So, just come out and say what it is -- dig deep.

[ Parent ]
I've had (4.00 / 3)
my own disagreements with Matt about issues surrounding race and the netroots, but I think the implication that he's a racist, especially delivered in such a back-handed, defensive, and obnoxious way, is patently ridiculous.  I'm sure we can all chalk it up to your need to defend your candidate, but I don't think you're gonna win a lot of friends trying to imply that Stoller hates black people, especially if you can't even bring yourself to come out and say it directly.

I support John McCain because children are too healthy anyway.
[ Parent ]
that wasn't my implication (0.00 / 0)
That thought did not even occur to me, and I'm sorry if it came off that way.  I honestly mean I don't understand the intensity of the hatred Matt displays for Obama out of all the candidates, and I don't think he's explained it adequately.
[ Parent ]
wha" (4.00 / 1)
you're joking right?
[ Parent ]
chalk one up (0.00 / 0)
it gets through to me and - though you'll have to take my word for it - i'm not an "anyone but obama" person.

i think there is indeed something deeper about obama that matt really hates (and no, it's not that he's a racist).  it's the one, big, major, constant complaint about obama: he doesn't lead.  he's done almost nothing in the senate, he's (and hilary) been waiting around to the end of votes to see how things are shaping up before casting his own vote.  and here he is, in the middle of a hugely important high stakes game and he's got to get to...iowa? no. new hampshire?  no.  south carolina?  no.  nevada?  no.  instead, he's got a very very important date in georgia.

and i couldn't disagree more that it's tiresome.  i feel, as a very very undecided dem, that these are very important critiques.  as are the critiques that are offered of all the candidates.  they've all got some big flaws.

what IS tiresome is how pro-whomever people can't abide by criticism.  they turn everything into a pie fight.

[ Parent ]
"hate" a man for not leading...? (0.00 / 0)
you're joking, right? Because there are a lot of Senators who didn't lead on Iraq back in 2002. Then again, in 2002, John Edwards did lead us  -- directly into war with Iraq. Edwards said Saddam was a "clear and present danger" as he cosponsored the attack Iraq bill with Joe Lieberman. Now THERE'S leadership.

Some people's memories, maybe Stoller's too, go back only as far as this campaign.

But I don't think it's hate that drives the vitriol. I think it's the same thing that causes columnists like Joe Klein to consistently sound like an ass. They write shit that makes no sense and then spend the rest of their careers trying to defend it, making them look like even bigger asses.

Stoller took a position on Obama a long time ago. And nothing Obama says or does seems to make any difference anymore -- it's all bad, all the time. 

That's unfortunate; as a result, criticism of Obama here loses its teeth. It's not credible anymore.  It's like FOX News complaining about Democrats -- totally predictable. After a while, visitors to the site realize it and move on.

Perhaps these guys will get over it -- whatever road rage is causing their veins to explode. Next time, before you hit the "post" button, take a breath ... count to 10 ... or save it as a draft. Think about it awhile. Is this man deserving of such bile? If Edwards did the same thing, how would you react?

You forgave Edwards for leading the charge to make a pre-emptive strike on an innocent country, causing the deaths of millions of Iraqis and casualties to thousands of Americans. If you can forgive a guy for that, but hate a guy for not voting on the MoveOn resolution, your wires are all screwed up.

[ Parent ]
so he didn't have (4.00 / 1)
a scheduling conflict?

He thought that not voting was stronger than voting nay?

[ Parent ]
not that I know of (0.00 / 0)
This was a deliberate choice; his Atlanta events are tonight, I believe.
[ Parent ]
Where's Edwards' vote? (0.00 / 0)
Oh, that's right.  He let Dole cast it.

-----

If it's a deciding vote, I'll buy this criticism.  Otherwise, it comes across as petty and self-interested.

[ Parent ]
Obama voted FOR the Boxer amendment. (0.00 / 0)
Obama voted in favor of the Boxer bill.
The Boxer bill was nothing but a disguised version of the Republican bill.

It doesn't matter that Obama didn't vote against the Republican bill.

What matters is that he did vote for Boxer's dumb amendment - after which he praised Patraeus and then (apparently) left town.

[ Parent ]
So? (4.00 / 2)
And what was he doing in Atlanta more important than spending one more hour to stand up on this vote. It's not like he's flying non-refundable (or probably even on a commercial flight).
That was the second betrayal. (0.00 / 0)
The first was voting for the Boxer amendment. As usual, the only Dem who didn't betray us was Feingold.

Actually, not voting for any statement might have been the best strategy if the Dems were not such hapless, craven asswipes. They could have just said this political ploy is beneath contempt and beneath the dignity of the Senate, and just all skipped the vote. But that would take brains and leadership.

I'm hoping I can still care about politics in this sorryass country, but it ain't looking good. Nader was right.

nader? (0.00 / 0)
Nader was an ENABLER of the RIGHT - nothing more!

What are you insane or just one of the last uninformed and unapologetic Nader voting fools.

Bush = Gore - My Ass!

[ Parent ]
bad comparison (4.00 / 7)
I've been keeping quiet through some of the more inane Obama criticism here because I really think others have been helpful (I'm speaking as a supporter). But really, a one thing sticks out here...

... and that's how out of whack it seems to me, to compare Obama's cancellation last night to his going ahead to Atlanta today. Last night's pressing Senate business was the Webb amendment, which if he'd skipped out on I'd be screaming as well. Today, it was a symbolic pointless resolution that all of us have ridiculed as a waste of time. So its perfectly consistent, then, for Obama to prioritize the people waiting for him in Atlanta, over sticking around just to cast a "no" vote. Hell, he's probably in Atlanta right now telling people what a disgusting exercise this all is.

It might not be the choice that everyone here would have made, relatively speaking. Its not like he was skipping out on the whole debate like Biden, as his vote for the Boxer amendment indicates. Odds are that things ran late and they made a judgment call on whether to stick around for the final vote. But he's not deliberately throwing anyone under a bus here by doing so, and to call it some sort of slick "betrayal" is ridiculous.

Here Here (0.00 / 0)
I was typing a comment that was essentially saying that. Thank you.
[ Parent ]
self correction (0.00 / 0)
Alright, I'm correcting myself-- I didn't realize the SC event was also supposed to be today. Clearly they made a call in advance (yesterday) that they wanted to be around for this and some other stuff. But that still doesn't preclude the on-the-spot judgment call that the Atlanta rally wasn't worth missing for this particular garbage, and maybe even that by voting for Boxer's amendment, he made his point. I know a lot of people are skeptical of Obama and scrutinizing his moves, and scrutiny can be good, but this one just seems much ado about nothing important. 
[ Parent ]
Apparently once you've sucked down... (4.00 / 2)
...the Obama Kool-Aid yer addicted for life.

This vote in the Senate was significant. The 'Betrayus' ad was seen as a truthful narrative of his disgusting behavior by most Americans.

They think he lied.

Yet when a citizen's group dares to point this out. The ReichWing goes nuts and then....

The 'Democrat' Party validates their criticism.

Stick a fork in the big hat, no cattle Obama. He's done for sure now.

And a hat tip for Hillary. She went a long way towards changing my mind about her.

She will stand up for what she believes.

Obama just flies out of town.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

[ Parent ]
I'm Not Going For Hillary, But Obama Is Gone For Good (4.00 / 1)
In fact, it's not just a matter of support.

I used to think it was inevitable that Obama would be President one day.  I no longer think that.  Every week, it seems--if not every day--he looks more and more like a very ordinary politician.

Of course, he could still change.  The Al Gore of today is not the pre-2001 Al Gore.  Just like the RFK of 1968 was not the pre-JFK assasination RFK.  Tranformation is always possible.  But Obama as he is now is so far removed from his original hype that it's not even funny.  It's tragic.

Or at least it used to be.  Now, it's just maudlin.

"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"

[ Parent ]
bullshit on one new myth (0.00 / 0)
Al Gore today is the same man he was in 2000.  Dont justify your ignorance and bad choice in 2000 (id bet anything that you were a Nader voter)on some self justifying BS about how Al Gore has changed.

He was always a good man, people like you were just caught up in your own sanctimony to see this.

[ Parent ]
Not True (4.00 / 1)
It's not a new myth, it's a widely acknowledge fact: Al Gore changed after losing winning the election in 2000.

In 2000, Al Gore wouldn't even fight to defend black voting rights when his own chance to be President was at stake.  That lack of moral courage had been utterly typical of him up to that point in his career.  He handed the presidency over to Bush by his own unwillingness to break the rules of Versailles decorum.

But a couple of years of reflection and the Iraq War changed all that.  He spoke out boldly and unambiguously against the war.  And that was just the beginning.  He has clearly re-adusted his sights.  He has become a significantly different person.  And for that, I salute him.

Now, it's true that I voted for Nader in 2000.  And I make no apologies for it.  Because I live in California, and the most sensible thing for me to do was send a message that I opposed the GOP-lite strategy of the Clinton/Gore years.  If I had lived in a swing state, I would have held my nose and voted for Gore.  But I didn't have to.  So I didn't.

It's called "strategy."  Deal with it.

"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"

[ Parent ]
You know Paul well enough... (0.00 / 0)
...to comment on his 'ignorance' do yah?

Hie thee over to LGF where such is considered civil discoures.

It don't belong here.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

[ Parent ]
Exactly (4.00 / 2)
Obama cancelled some appearances for an important vote on the war,  voteing for the Webb amendment.  Stayed around to vote for the Boxer version of the silly consensus resolution helping to give it a slim majority.  Now, Stoller is outraged that he didn't hang out to vote against the Coryn version.  That outrage seems pretty Fox-worthy since it is pretty much over nothing, that bill got about 70 votes and Obama's vote wasn't going to stop it.

No candidate is perfect, and I do expect folks to take ours to task when the actually mess up, but it seems pretty clear to me that Stoller has a chip on his shoulder about Obama.  Whatever it is, it is starting to damage Matt's writing and credibility as he seems have an ability to be outraged about the smallest of slights.  When Stoller writes about some issue that Obama really messes up no one will be left to take him seriously.

I am an Obama supporter, so I do have some element of bias, I guess I wouldn't be as annoyed if it was Hilary that Stoller spent half his time trashing.

My job is not to represent Washington to you, but to represent you to Washington- Obama
Philly for Obama

[ Parent ]
I would with Hillary... (4.00 / 4)
...or Edwards, or anyone else for that matter. Constructive criticism is good (though folks shouldn't be afraid to disagree with it), but ridiculous standards aren't.

I respect that people might disagree with Obama deciding his supporters in ATL were more important than casting the final "No" vote against this trash. I understand why people would take that position. But to me, its equally valid to make a judgment call that this whole thing is ridiculous, and you're not gonna waste another minute on it. That's what I think Obama did, and agree or disagree, it doesn't amount to a "betrayal" or anything nearly that strong, and shouldn't be some sort of window into judging him as a whole (except maybe for those who have already made up their mind).

[ Parent ]
They don't respect you. (4.00 / 2)
"I respect that people might disagree with Obama deciding his supporters in ATL were more important than casting the final "No" vote against this trash."

They think your opinion is Kool-Aid induced.

[ Parent ]
Agreed (4.00 / 1)
Not a betrayal, but a big disappointment. Obama's diehard supporters are downplaying this vote as trivial. I don't think it will turn out that way. The Senate Democrats turned on one of the organizations that gave them their majority status. I believe that will mark a turning point in our near-term political history. Now no one can trust the Dems when they have to choose between strategic dumbass surrender and standing up for their friends. So who's going to be their friends now? They had their best opportunity since FDR and they blew it miserably. The coalition is dead.

I do agree that the focus should be on the shits that voted for the resolution. But Obama's absence does not speak well of him. I started campaign season as an Obama supporter, then felt more and more disappointed at his obvious inexperience and political timidity. This vote hasn't changed that, but it's hard to imagine the enthusiasm coming back anytime soon.

[ Parent ]
Attacking the military (4.00 / 1)
Attacking Paetreaus is not too smart. The American people have more confidence in the military than the Democrats, Republicans AND bUSH

i AM A VETERAN OF THE vIETNAM WAR AND JUST A GENERATION AGO WE TOOK A LOT OF ABUSE FROM THE ANTI-WAR MOVEMENT.

If you think it is good politics to attack General Paetreaus, then you will lose the american people. This is like attacking the troops.

I was against this war from the beginning and did not support the AUF WHICH I KNEW WOULD RESULT IN SENDING AMERICAN TROOPS INTO iRAQ.

I cannot understand why Hillary didn't know that. She was either naive or did it for politicL PURPOSES. Perhaps she thought her vote was the correct one and the Bush administration didn't conduct gthe war properly.

[ Parent ]
when I writ that Hillarys vote in 2003 wouldnt have stopped (0.00 / 0)
anything, that we would still be in Iraq... (Bush was going to war no matters if every Dem voted no)

You Obama fans go NUTS!

A little consistancy please.

[ Parent ]
Obama didn't skip out on the debate... (0.00 / 0)

The Boxer amendment "... criticized actions that question the honor of armed services members generally..."

This is what Obama voted for.


[ Parent ]
Matt Stoller hates Obama? (4.00 / 3)
NO!

I would've never guessed.

Meanwhile, back in the real world:

Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.) was not present for any of the votes, while Obama voted earlier in the day but left for an event in Atlanta.

Seriously, people care about this?  It's a toothless bill, designed to piss everyone off.  Congratulations on being manipulated by Sen. Cornyn and his Republican cohorts.

You're really "winning" the fight here.

No One Ever Mistook Biden For Anything More Than A Worm (4.00 / 1)
Certianly not since his key role in getting Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court--and that was 16 friggin years ago!

So "Better Than Joe Biden" is not really a very inspiring campaign slogan, know what I mean?

"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"

[ Parent ]
Don't bother.... (0.00 / 0)
reason is waste on those who 'Hope'.

Me?

I can vote for Hillary now with a clear conscience.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

[ Parent ]
a worm? (0.00 / 0)
coming from someone who enabled Bush to be President to begin with (Nader 2000)...thats rich...
[ Parent ]
How Did A Vote For Nader In California Enable Bush? (0.00 / 0)
Answer: It didn't.

You are lying in plain of everyone.

Not really a smart move.

"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"

[ Parent ]
asdf (0.00 / 0)
first, no one but his wife and kids give a sh!t about biden and his campaign, so what he and mike gravel get up to can pass without notice.  obama is another story entirely and it is hard to believe anyone would make such a comparison genuinely.

second, the set of people cornyn et al are trying to get riled up does not include us.  it is limited entirely to the people who create the narratives, the major press organizations: "Senate Slams MoveOn.org as Offensive,"  "Major Liberal Organization Criticized for Insulting General," etc.

in response to people who've (in however small a part) advanced that narrative people on this side of the fight have a right to be bothered.  maybe this particular fight was lost before it began.  but that doesn't excuse people that would be our president from sticking around to fight the fight.

[ Parent ]
They should have just abstained (4.00 / 1)
I think the Dems should have all abstained on Cornyn's bill and said it was a waste of time.
Obama needs to grow a pair (0.00 / 0)
There is a reason Axelrod couldn't get Duckworth elected despite unlimited money for Emanuel's vanity race.

This really is disgusting. Audacity to be a coward, indeed.

Stoller is very quickly becoming irrelevant (4.00 / 3)

By "Stoller," Of Course, You Mean "Obama" (4.00 / 4)
It was, after all, Obama who thought that not voting was a thundering declaration of moral purpose.

"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"
[ Parent ]
Obama :im sure he'll make a fine Governor (0.00 / 0)
if he can get elected that is.

He has no chance in this race.  Tis over.

[ Parent ]
...amongst Obama die harders who nonetheless show up to see what he has to say. (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
someone want to explain why horizonr was banned for this comment? (0.00 / 0)
http://www.mydd.com/...

Calling Obama a putz is ok, but calling Stoller irrelevant is not?

[ Parent ]
Betrayal? (0.00 / 0)
Obama is not "betraying" us.
He's just being Obama.
Obama is right (4.00 / 2)
I think all senator's democrats should have just plain refused to vote on this grand standing by the republicans.
I think Reid should have never let this vote come to the floor.

I am as anti-war as anybody, but as a former military officer and combat veteran of Vietnam, I found it appaling to headline the AD as General Betryus. It is plain stupid to take a shot at the military commander in Iraq.

I am sensitive to this because we veteran's of Vietnam were not treated to kindly by the anti war left when we returned home from vietnam.

Paul were you a veteran, then don't be so quick to condem us for our defense of Paetreaus  we took a lot of abuse from the anti-war crowd a generation ago.

I was against the AUF from the get go and have taken Clinto to task over her vote, yet people here give her a free ride.

Obama is right not to participate in this charade.

[ Parent ]
Obama did participate. (0.00 / 0)
I believe that you are referring to the vote on the Republican bill to condemn MoveOn.org's ad as a "charade" in which Obama was "right not to participate...".

The criticism of Obama is that he did in fact participate in this charade by casting his vote in favor of the Boxer amendment which also condemned MoveOn.org's ad.

[ Parent ]
Stoller is very quickly becoming irrelevant (4.00 / 2)

News Flash! (0.00 / 0)
Francisco Franco is still dead!
[ Parent ]
WDC Dem Leadership Betrays in Quest for Power (0.00 / 0)
and Matt, yet again, does not even find the strategy in this series of events.

Moveon folks need to take a look at Vietnam and how well it works to trash the military.  An effective ad could have attacked the facts and not the military.  Instead of defending their bad decision, moveon needs to recalibrate.

Then we have the Dem WDC leadership bringing this mess to a Senate vote.  And there's always political strategy behind this stuff and that's what Matt never examines.  And I mean, never.

This move by the WDC Dem leadership was to undercut moveon's money-raising ability and to smear the candidates that moveon money goes to--and that is Dems that this establishment does not want to have.

Hillary is the candidate chosen by this establishment to deflect the Dems' miserable votes that got us into this war.  It helps Hillary in allowing some moveon supporters to view her more kindly.  And it took a swing at Obama, who (with Edwards) is against the WDC Dem leadership.

Matt never, ever sees this sort of thing, apparently because he simply cannot believe that Dems will go after Dems.  The WDC Dem leadership is fighting hard for their own survival; the mood in the Dem base is against them and is growing stronger.  These Dems in power are trusting that the movement will fizzle and, in the meantime, they are deflecting it.

Will it fizzle?  I don't think so, but these Dems in power want to believe.  And there's no reason for Matt to help them out.

The anti-establishment candidates are Edwards and Obama and they scare the pants off these Dems.  So do organizations like moveon.

Get smarter or get buried, Matt.  Same goes for moveon.

Obama Betrays Us, Of Course | 51 comments
Donate to Open Left









QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.

blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
LIBERAL INSTITUTIONS
STATE BLOGS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2009, Powered by SoapBlox