Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Well the alternative approach to Obama's bipartisan incrementalism would have been to:

  1. withdraw quickly from Iraq/Afghanistan
  2. instigate a judicial investigation into illegal wire tapping/manipulation of intelligence
  3. release Guantanamo inmates who can't be tried
  4. let a few "too big to fail" banks go bust
  5. instigate a Tobin tax to fund massive stimulus plan to reduce the resulting fall-out
  6. Tell Liebermann that all support for Israel will cease unless he toes the party line
  7. Tell any Senator who strays from a party line vote that they will loose their seniority and be primaried at the first opportunity.
  8. Agree an ambitious Climate Change Treaty and challenge the Senate NOT to ratify it.

Would it have worked?
Would Obama still be alive?
Would centrist Senators fall in line?
Would the economy have gone into free-fall - or would the impact of the bank failures have been self-rectifying fairly quickly with other banks filling the void?

The neo-cons shock doctrine of create chaos, new facts on the ground, and then rapid change has been very successful in moving the overton window way off the scale.  Perhaps that is the only way Obama could have implemented a radical agenda always presuming he had one.  But it seems clear he was always married to the US congressional process - as befits a constitutional lawyer.

So why are we surprised?

notes from no w here

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Wed Dec 16th, 2009 at 07:10:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:

JakeS 4


Top Diaries

Occasional Series