Saturday, November 3, 2012

REBLOG Why is the left defending Obama?

One of the primary reasons I posted Matt Stoller's earlier piece here is that, as a LIberal Progressive (with libertarian tendencies) I happen to agree with him - electing Barack Obama may indeed be better for America then Mitt Romney, but not because Barack Obama is a liberal progressive President.  And yet, in the public rebuttal, Stoller seems to have been subjected by so-called Liberal Commentators to the name calling, strawmen, and ad hominem attacks that we normally see reserved for use by Republicans against Democrats.  Still, the question is asked - Why is the left defending Obama?

It is remarkable to see the level to which Obama defenders have sunk. Let’s start with a basic problem – why is Obama in a tight race? Mitt Romney is more caricature than candidate, a horrifically cartoonish plutocrat whose campaign is staffed by people that allow secret tapings of obviously offensive statements. The Republican base finds Romney uninspiring, and Romney has been unable to provide one good reason to choose him except that he is not the incumbent. Yet, Barack Obama is in a dog fight with this clown. Why? It isn’t because a few critics are writing articles in places like Salon. The answer, if you look at the data, is thatBarack Obama has been a terrible President and an enemy to progressives. Unemployment is high. American household income since the recovery started in 2009 has dropped 5%. Poverty has increased substantially. Home equity – the main store of wealth for the middle class – has dropped by $5-7 trillion, in contrast to the increase in financial asset values held by Obama’s friends and donors. And this was done explicitly through Obama’s policies.

No comments: