LA Times: The "Elizabeth Warren Wing" of The Democratic Party On The Ascendancy

[libdem4life]

106. Loved the article...wonderful news. And I like the EW Wing of the Party...she's earned it.

But it feels to me like a single-issue political attraction. Anti-corporation ... there is no reason as of yet to believe she wishes to do anything other than to take them to task. The caveat to that is that we have found another Messiah. I remember the Obama Messiah group...and the outrage when he didn't deliver the anticipated miracles. And the Democrats were the loudest.

Her work is the entire reset of the exceedingly complicated and inner workings of the foundation of our economy, yea the global economy. This doesn't happen with sound bites or on a checklist of To Dos. She just may be able to pull off some real miracles in this arena.

JP Morgan Chase paid their first, huge fine for their European manipulations. Recently, they paid a rather large one here with more to come. I firmly believe that her unique ability, personal magnetism (startling for an economist in a numbers-crunching world), and passion will enable her to do far and away more than she could being shuttered in as a president, forced to deal with the global political melange that keeps all Presidents dangerously close to the political cliff.

Presidents have little direct power over the economy and that's her work. Being in the Senate on the Banking Committee is the most powerful position for her influence, guidance, and ability to use her own bully pulpit for the good of all the Parties and even the non-voters...we, all the people for real, and she is able to make people understand. Comes from her career as a law professor.

The following article...it's long but fascinating and instructive. The President's power is immense as being the global leader ... wars, complex foreign negotiations, relationships with experienced world leaders such as the G-8 and G-20 ... presidencies are made and lost there. (The striking photo of JFK and RFK is worth a click to see.) Not economics...at least economics over which they have any power. The dearth of job programs and disappointing job growth figures is not because of PBOs intransigence or failure. But he gets blamed for it on a daily basis. I do not see Warren fitting into this scenario. We would lose a rare jewel.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/Power-and-the-Presidency-From-Kennedy-to-Obama.html

Obama has had a hard first term because he Was Not a Washington Insider. He didn't know how it worked, didn't have the alliances and relationships needed to push through his agenda. He was politically weak because of that...not because he was incapable or lacking determination or a weak person.

Also, because Populism doesn't work for a president. It may help get him elected, and there may be incidental or incremental gains, but there are more populist groups at the national level. Even more restrictive is the Federal Bureaucracy, which exists fairly permanently and operates independently even as Presidents come and go.

Someone reminded me that Carter may have been the only "Liberal" president in my life as I noticed all have been Centrists during my lifetime...starting with Truman. That is not a comforting political notation. He was brilliant, a warm and caring human being, mostly liberal, but easily the most failed President in recent history. He, also, was a Washington Outsider.

She is not a Washington Insider and she would be the first woman...tough row to hoe. I can see her as Majority Leader of the Senate or Treasury Secretary, although I selfishly want her to continue harassing the murky Robber Barons milking the middle-class and bring their asses to justice, at best, or back in line at least. Without her in this role, they will skate off with more of our national treasure...taxpayers funds...repossessed homes...bankrupted students via their usurious loans...cutting out on regulations...blocking further regulations...the list goes on. No one person has been able to do much of anything. This is Huge. Elizabeth Warren is the person for it.

I pray that all this Progressive Presidential Pleading does not deter her from her focus on what she does best...take the corporations to the proverbial woodshed. Again, at the risk of being repetitive, as President she can do Very Little About Corporate Thievery, their reproducing like bunnies, and free rein to operate back in the shadows. And, as a candidate, she'd need to be in a position to be required to take their money...one way or the other...and that's not even smart. I think she knows that, as she's a smart person.

Last of all, I have little knowledge on her political positions on the vast regions of global politics other than economics. I'm going to assume she's pro-choice. But what about the TPP? Has she said anything about that? That is definitely within her field and important to Progressives. Where is she on war...we have Armageddon potentially emerging in the Middle East. One or two assassinations away from possible chaos. Foreign policy? Single Payer health insurance? Is her family on board? (I hear that's a no) Does she have any health problems?

Very little vetting has been done. The Republicans will hate her worse than Hillary and I don't need to state the obvious reasons, the least of which being she is a female. They will devour her with her inexperience, if nothing else. She doesn't appear to be the type that would take that well, at all.

Teachers and Professors excel at being in control...the ones setting the classroom stage, providing the information and asking the questions, because they know the answers. Politicians/Presidents have to think, act and speak on their feet in a variety of venues, to a variety of interests, questions and even taunting.

I hope she stays the course.