Andrew Sullivan: Getting Shit Done

[babylonsister]

And if you don't like the author, don't torture yourself and read this. :hi:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/06/getting-shit-done.html

Getting Shit Done
Andrew Sullivan

17 Jun 2010 12:11 pm


What are the odds that Obama's huge success yesterday in getting BP to pledge a cool $20 billion to recompense the "small people" in the Gulf will get the same attention as his allegedly dismal speech on Tuesday night? If you take Memeorandum as an indicator, it really is no contest. The speech is still being dissected by language experts, but the $20 billion that is the front page news in the NYT today? Barely anywhere on the blogs.

This is just a glimpse into the distortion inherent in our current political and media culture. It's way easier to comment on a speech - his hands were moving too much! - than to note the truly substantive victory, apparently personally nailed down by Obama, in the White House yesterday. If leftwing populism in America were anything like as potent as right-wing populism - Matt Bai has a superb analysis of this in the NYT today - there would be cheering in the streets. But there's nada, but more leftist utopianism and outrage on MSNBC. And since there's no end to this spill without relief wells, this is about as much as Obama can do, short of monitoring clean-up efforts, or rather ongoing management of the ecological nightmare of an unstopped and unstoppable wound in the ocean floor.

I sure understand why people feel powerless and angry about the vast forces that control our lives and over which we seem to have only fitful control - big government and big business. But it seems to me vital to keep our heads and remain focused on what substantively can be done to address real problems, and judge Obama on those terms. When you do, you realize that the left's "disgruntleist" faction needs to take a chill pill.

snip//

I don't see all this as ideologically liberal or leftist - which is where I agree with some of Obama's sternest critics. But I never saw Obama as such and never supported him as such. He may, however, end up a liberal hero. To see why check out Michael Tomasky's sharp essay in Democracy Journal. Money quote:

Our political culture affects the way we think about the past as well. Too often, when progressives think of American history, we think only of the snapshots: those glorious moments when a historic bill is signed into law, or when the great progressive leader thunderingly confronts the forces of reaction. It’s good to remember those; they are our lodestars. But they are moments. Actual history is slower, more tedious, and certainly less uplifting. It’s not for Obama’s sake, but for liberalism’s over the long haul, that we need to consider this reality and proceed in full awareness of it. It’s only by seeing this fuller picture that we can know how history actually unfolds in real time and place our present experience within that context. We don’t do nearly enough of that. Cable news and op-ed pages and websites are a kind of modern-day camera obscura, giving us an image to be sure, accurate in a way, but upside-down.

The changes we want to see won’t happen in 18 months, or in two years, or four, or probably even eight. Indeed, the entire Obama era, if it lasts eight years, is best thought of not as a culmination, or a self-contained time frame that should be judged a failure if X, Y, and Z don’t happen. It’s the start of a process that may take 16 years, or 24; that may be along the way interrupted or undone; that will be fought tooth and nail, as we’ve plainly seen these recent months, by others whose idea of America is incomprehensible to us but who are citizens too, with the same rights we have. They (and by the way: no despair on their side! There is rage, to be sure, but judging from the Tea Party events I’ve been to and watched, it is a joyful rage) and the corporate interests and the elected representatives on their side have a lot of power. Liberal despair only reinforces their power and helps to ensure that whatever gains are made during the Obama term could quickly be rolled back. And if that happens, we are back, ten years from now, to fighting the usual rearguard battles.

And that's why Obama's incrementalism, his refusal to pose as a presidential magician, and his resistance to taking the bait of the fetid right (he's president - not a cable news host) seems to me to show not weakness, but a lethal and patient strength. And a resilient ambition.

Know hope.

[zipplewrath]

1. I can cheer the 20 billion

and still observe that he didn't really make a good speech. And he is missing the chance to advance some very progressive ideas on reducing our need for oil. The two are not in conflict.

[treestar]

16. If he made a good speech, you'd be saying "it's just a speech"

so why bother to comment on bad speeches? They have no effect either.

[zipplewrath]

18. Actually, I tend not to

I'm one of the ones that points out "I have a dream" was just a speech. My real criticism of the speech was the content, or lack thereof. The fact that it was also bland is basically just an observation.

[K8-EEE]

28. "Anyone can read a telepromter...."

He gets slammed for all speeches, good and bad. Whatever. Thank God Gramps & Quitter aren't at the helm is all I can say.

[pezDispenser]

58. not true

Look at how Giuliani handled 9-11. You and I may not agree with the guy on 99% of the issues, but he was a real leader in a time of crisis. Hell, hourly he was in front of a camera, letting the citizens of NY aware of even the tinyiest changes the city was making to services. This was both informative and reassuring.

Sure, he had advantages that Obama doesn't have, but man Obama's handling of this oil spill has really been poor. IMHO.

[SkyDaddy7]

72. So you want Obama to ACT like...

Republicans do and be in front of the camera saying LOOK AT ME I AM DOING SOMETHING!!

Obama is not one to "ACT" like he is doing something...He just does his job and does not feel the nd to say LOOK AT ME I AM DOING SOMETHING! He has handles this oil spill by doing what he can!

Next folks will blame Obama for not preventing damage done by tornadoes or hurricanes...This oil spill is no different! Humans simply do not have that ability. However, Obama is suppose to be superman and create votes where there are not any, change America to a Liberal Country overnight, plug a oil leak that is impossible to plug with current technology and prevent all damage from oil coming ashore.

However, I guess you want Obama to ACT like he can?

[pezDispenser]

75. in your vitriolic response, I guess you missed my point

Obama cannot stop the well from spewing oil any more than Rudy could have prevented the planes flying into the twin towers. The difference is in the response.

Right after 9-11 Rudy was making decisions about little things that had direct affect on peoples lives. They decided to shut down specific streets, Rudy was on tv explaining how and why. The changed bus and train schedules, Rudy told everyone why and when. They changed garbage pickup dates, we knew why because we had things explained to us like adults.

Obama has asked me to pray. To be fair he also got agreement on setting up an escrow account that will be funded quarterly. Make no mistake though, this money would have been paid out via our court system. It remains to be seen if this system will payout faster than the court system would have.

Here is some advice, take it for what it's worth. The D's vs. R's game that we are fed nightly is just carney shit. You have 2 choices. Either stroll down the midway, ballon in hand and enjoy the cotton candy like every other rube out there, or put some real thought into things. Not everyone with a D behind their name is on our side.

[Enthusiast]

78. Giuliani? A real leader in

a time of crisis? Anyone, even a dumb ass like George W Bush can look like a leader under 'those' conditions. What did he say or do that demonstrated his leadership? He did nothing any other mayor, even a small town mayor, could have done under similar circumstances. Are you a fucking Freeper?

[pezDispenser]

83. nope, not a freeper

Just a strong progressive who doesn't fall for the carny show that you many on the left and right seem to constantly buy into. Apparently you didn't read my response, as I gave 3 concrete examples of what he did.

I'm not sure what your point is about 'those' conditions.

Point to some leadership, by anyone - I'm not only knocking Obama for this oil disaster. Just 1 solid example.

[Enthusiast]

84. What you cited as great leadership

by Giuliani is why I say any small town mayor could have done the same. And what I said is the truth. Only a dyed in the wool real Republican believer would praise Giuliani for what he did, at least now, in retrospect. Maybe at the time some could have been caught up in an undeserved hero worship.

[necso]

2. Generally,

it's inexpedient to piss on your allies... whichever way the piss is flying -- these things tend to escalate.

Prodding them from time to time, however, may prove necessary; lest they take you for granted.

[Tarheel_Dem]

3. I absolutely love it. Thanks for posting. (nt)

[AtomicKitten]

62. +1

[Inuca]

4. Love him or hate him, SUllivan

is very smart and writes very well. The last paragraph you boldfaced is a tiny masterpiece IMHO.

[impik]

5. F****ck yea!

[Pisces]

6. Posturing rules the day on this board and the MSM. Governing is too boring and a long hard slog.

[Cha]

22. Excellent +1

[CakeGrrl]

7. Long-term thinking is in short supply EVERYWHERE

Everyone wants something NOW, and you'd better *look* and *sound* busy doing it or else.

[Blue Owl]

53. greedy, money-grubbing profiteers & their lobbyists

throwing safety to the wind for a bigger bonus -- and just look at the results.

[AngryAmish]

8. Would he say "getting shit done" if the President was a white guy?

Unconscious racism.

[babylonsister]

10. HUH?? You've got to be kidding. I've used that expression in

relation to a lot of things.

You're worryin' about the wrong things, I think.

[Gordan Shumway]

14. What point are you trying to make?

Sarcastic racist isn't a good schtick.

[Mimosa]

15. I doubt it

Unless Sullivan's brain is decaying and his mentality has declined to the level of morons who infect the internet with coarse language. That's entirely possible.

Sullivan isn't somebody I look to for deep thoughts.

[Alcibiades]

19. That's just wrong

His brain may well decay. It's bad karma to make cute little points about someone's illnesses--karma you don't want. Shit, even as much as I hated Reagan, when he wound up dying of a degenerative neurological disorder, I didn't drop everything and celebrate the day of his death, as had been my plan when he was actually president and I was younger.

Anyway, Sullivan's actually making more sense, and I think becoming a better person, as he gets older.

[Mimosa]

20. All our brains decline with age.

We lose brain cells at the rate of a million a day after age 35 iirc.

Sullivan was a better writer when he visited a board I post on (link is my sig). Way back in 2003 or 2004 he used to borrow ideas and phrases from a guy who posts there (Vince Volaju) who used to go by the name Doc Holliday on the board which preceded it. Vince used to post stuff and we'd read Vince's phrases sometimes changed not much if at all a week or two later in Sullivan's columns. Sullivan is not original.

[clarence swinney]

37. I RESENT THAT analysis

old old old

what do i mean durn if i can recall

[rox63]

32. I used the phrase at work just yesterday in a totally unrelated context

And I'm pretty darn white. I said it in reference to having to spend way too much time in meetings instead of spending my time "getting shit done".

[demwing]

38. I'm sure you're a very bright person, but that accusation was just dim

What's your logic?

[Bluenorthwest]

9. When Sully attempted to explain why he supported the Iraq War

and Bush Policy, he eventually broke it down to four basic mistakes on his part, the first of which he called 'Historical Narcissism'. Here is what he said about himself in 2008, about his war support. Just for perspective.
"When I heard the usual complaints from the left about how we had no right to intervene, how Bush was the real terrorist, how war was always wrong, my trained ears heard the same cries that I had heard in the 1980s. So I saw the opposition to the war as another example of a faulty Vietnam Syndrome, associated it with the far left, or boomer nostalgia, and was revolted by the anti-war marches I saw in Washington. I became much too concerned with fighting that old internal ideological battle, and failed to think freshly or realistically about what the consequences of intervention could be. I allowed myself to be distracted by an ideological battle when what was required was clear-eyed prudence."

So there's that for you.

[Dawson Leery]

23. Sullivan still has his blind hatred of the left.

He seems to have a crush on Obama for some reason.

He was one of the worst Bush loyalists around and that says it all for me.

[babylonsister]

24. Whaaa. I warned you in my comments. I consider myself

on the left, and I'm not feelng the hatred. :shrug: Why are you?

[Bluenorthwest]

57. To you, this is about 'like and dislike' and that is daft.

This man has a record. His misjudgment of 'the left' and his characterizations of the anti-Iraq demonstrations, which he found "revolting", lead him to make vast errors for which in the past he has said he will never forgive himself for. And yet he is doing the same thing. His 'mistakes' around Iraq were so profound that I personally wonder why anyone would place any value o his views, particularly of 'the left'. I also wonder why, knowing all of that, an adult would wish to frame opinions about the man as being about popularity or taste, rather than knowledge of the man and his record.
I hope that was clear enough. If he told me he like my sweater, I'd go change.

[EFerrari]

71. His praise of the tea klanners is especially precious.

Poor Andrew. He really stick to things he can write about, like himself.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

64. "He seems to have a crush on Obama for some reason."

He does.


I don't know him, but I know people who do know him.

[Dawson Leery]

65. Really?

PM me if you do not mind.
Thank you.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

77. well

I don't know for sure. that's just what I was told. could be bogus.

[Vattel]

26. wow, that's an impressive self-critical insight

[Jennicut]

11. Patient strength is correct.

[Bluenorthwest]

12. Sully on his pre war support of GW Bush and onward:

"I was concerned - ha! - that Gore would spend too much. I was reassured by the experience and intelligence and pedigree of Cheney and Rumsfeld and Powell. Two of them had already fought and won a war in the Gulf. The bitter election battle hardened my loyalty. And once 9/11 happened, my support intensified as I hoped for the best. His early speeches were magnificent."

I post these words of Sullivan's because you chose to paint those of us who recall such words of Sullivan's as 'not liking him'. I like Andrew just fine, thank you. I do not trust his ability to discern the character or motives of either the Bush crew, or the left, who he keeps chiding in the exact same terms as he did in his defense of Bush. For whom he voted. Because Cheney reassured him. So, please, with facts like that, do not reduce my very prudent use of a grain of salt to some personal 'like or dislike'. The facts are on my side. Emotion and personality has nothing to do with that. Because you like what he says today, really this is no reason to make him a banner. The Bush v Gore events hardened his loyalty to Bush. And such a banner, it is a risky one to run up any flagpole.
I closing, I actually like the man, but I'd not trust him to feed my cat for the weekend.

[treestar]

17. What has the start of the Iraq War got to do with this?

:wtf:

[Bluenorthwest]

55. Are you really that simple minded? Or just playing coy?

It is not the war itself that is at issue here, but Mr Sullivan's perceptions at that time of both his hated liberals and his beloved conservatives, his lack of discernment. The point is perspective upon the author of these ideas, who has in the past slandered 'the left' for opposing that war.
Do you actually fail to see the connection between a man's track record and the worth of his opinion? Even when he has been so wrong as to assist an illegal war and torture and all manner of crimes? Do you see GW Bush as a good source of opinion as well?

[AlbertCat]

46. "His early speeches were magnificent."

They were????

People keep saying that but I don't know what they are talking about. I mean... "Magnificent"? I thought even the big post 9/11 speech was a bunch of I-know-what-you-want-to-hear platitudes delivered with completely unconvincing acting. Even by that Sept, I was surprised Bush could pronounce all the words and get them in order. Apparently he did that at least and everyone thinks that was "magnificent"!

Reagan was no "great communicator' either.

[boycottfaux]

56. Absolutely

I totally agree with you.  I thought I was alone . .

Bush didn't even write his speeches and videos prove he
couldn't even read the three sylable words.  Bush/Cheney and
neocons have alot to answer for when they meet the God they're
always praising but have never really followed!!

[tomp]

47. anyone who could support bush/cheney for one billionth of one nanosecond....

....is a complete fucking idiot and a danger to others. anyone who posts his quotes isn't much better.

for the record. $20 billion is spit in the bucket compared to the overall damage caused by this spill (yes, i know it's "uncapped"). what obama did was grandstand with an extremely lowballed number (more likely in the trillions in real impact) as if there were some amount of fucking money that could really correct this and even things out.

obama=fail and anyone who boosts him up, especially at the expense of the left, the only group that is consistently right about every damn thing, is a danger to others.

[Enthusiast]

79. "anyone who could support bush/cheney for one billionth

of one nanosecond is a complete fucking idiot and a danger to others."

And that is the fucking truth.

[ncteechur]

13. Andrew Sullivan gets it correct most of the time. This time, too! nm

[Cha]

21. Andrew zeroed in on that one...quite the opposite

from most of the US mediawhores.

"And that's why Obama's incrementalism, his refusal to pose as a presidential magician, and his resistance to taking the bait of the fetid right (he's president - not a cable news host) seems to me to show not weakness, but a lethal and patient strength. And a resilient ambition."

As many of his supporters already know.

[Historic NY]

33. I am sometimes impatient but progress is always slow...he has 8yrs to overcome.

[SomeGuyInEagan]

48. I would say he has 30 years to overcome, but agree with the sentiment ... he signed up to ...

... lead us out of a mess of major proportions, certainly the worst in my lifetime. But the country has corrected before and I hope leaders as every level (governments, business, education, community groups, churches ... everywhere) step to to do it again. Clearly, much of the thinking of the past 30 years that got us into this mess needs to be tossed aside.

[Cha]

59. Especially after 8 years of a bush-cheney coup..

and the US corporatemedia/aka/republicons attempting to thwart our Government at every step of the way.

[treestar]

25. This is a good observation:

"Liberal despair only reinforces their power and helps to ensure that whatever gains are made during the Obama term could quickly be rolled back."

I am amazed at how weak the left is with persistence - no "lethal, patient, strength." Abandoning the goals already seems to make them seem undesirable goals.

One thing about right wingers, they hang in there. For example, the anti-choice crowd. Look at it from their point of view - in spite of Bush and Scalia, etc., they are no where near what they want, and after 35 years. But they still slog it out.

[GeorgeGist]

27. Thank You, Ma'am

but the fact of the matter is that President Obama doesn't have the critical thinking skills to identify the proper enemy in his war plan.

It's real simple, Nature hates Greed.

[dave29]

34. I love it when people paint emotions on nature.

Nature, for all it's beauty, does not give a squat about greed. We hate greed, and what it does to our perceptions of nature.

[Scurrilous]

29. K & R

:thumbsup:

[Duppers]

30. wow.

just wow.

[NJmaverick]

31. K & R!

[closeupready]

35. Why do people here post a gay Republican's thoughts about Obama?

And further, why give their pundits exposure and free publicity?

[demwing]

39. Does being gay give him lesser, or greater respectability?

Why even go there?

[closeupready]

41. Being 1) gay; and 2) Republican is to be an oxymoronic piece of performance 'art'.

And if I have to explain that, you haven't been paying attention to our political process for the last 50 years.

[demwing]

45. So Republicans can't dictate who gays and lesbians love

But you can? A gay man can't love a Republican?

And since when did Republican mean the opposite of Gay? If it doesn't, how can the term Gay Republican be an oxymoron?

[Empathic_1]

76. !

That was well said. :applause:

[rury]

40. I think it's because this

gay Republican told the truth.
Facts are facts regardless of one's sexual orientation or political affiliation.

[clarence swinney]

36. TURN HIM OFF

I have written all I could find (emailaddresses) in White House.
His staff is failing him or he will not listen to advice.

Head--left right left right left right right left right left

count the number of times in ten minutes he moves his head from one side to the other side
count the number of times in one minute

Drive me Batty.

His first Oval Office Speech.

A Presentation disaster

Review tapes of others.

Hand motions horrible. Meaningless just habit.

Cannot they hire a Toastmaster to Train him to get rid of these irritants?

He needs an in front teleprompter. I have used them. You appear to be talking to your TV audience.

IT IS HORRID

I put a towel over lower part of screen to keep from screaming.
olduglymean-irritated

[Laelth]

42. Yet another attack on the left. Yawn. n/t

:dem:

-Laelth

[Mimosa]

63. ^ Exactly! ^ n/t

[Blue_Tires]

43. k+r

[redqueen]

44. "It’s not for Obama’s sake, but for liberalism’s over the long haul...'

"They (and by the way: no despair on their side! There is rage, to be sure, but judging from the Tea Party events I’ve been to and watched, it is a joyful rage) and the corporate interests and the elected representatives on their side have a lot of power. Liberal despair only reinforces their power and helps to ensure that whatever gains are made during the Obama term could quickly be rolled back. And if that happens, we are back, ten years from now, to fighting the usual rearguard battles."

Nice.

Thanks for posting this.

K&R

[tranche]

49. Kicked and I liked Michael Tomasky's piece you quoted.

[anachro1]

50. He should have asked for

$100 BILLION.

[spicegal]

51. People who aren't actually burdened with making the

big decisions and solving serious problems just love to criticize those who do. By right wing standards, Obama can do nothing right. By media standards, they must have something to carp about. It gets more attention.

[Blue_Roses]

52. hear, hear!

:bounce:

[TomClash]

54. In other words

The MSM sucks. They have no substance at all.

[hulka38]

60. Wasn't Sullivan a gay Republican until very recently?

[AtomicKitten]

61. Nope. He changed parties the summer of 2008 & is registered as an independent. nt

[hulka38]

67. So he was a Republican until recently.

[jonnyblitz]

68. yes, you were correct the first time you posted. I don't know why

Atomic Kitten told you 'No" then stated exactly what you posted. :crazy:

[hileeopnyn8d]

70. No, you're all wrong.

He isn't, or wasn't, registered with any party. And if he wasn't a citizen, then he didn't vote either.

[hulka38]

73. I'm not an authority on the man so that's why I asked.

I just Wikied him and it states that he supported W in 2000, was for the invasion of Iraq War and is a small govt conservative. He has supported Kerry and Obama and also is a big Ron Paul guy. He seems to be a case where his talents as a writer exceed his judgement.

[hileeopnyn8d]

74. "He seems to be a case where his talents as a writer exceed his judgement."

I can't really argue with that.

[AtomicKitten]

82. I don't consider 2 years ago VERY recently. nt

[hileeopnyn8d]

69. I'm not sure if he's a

citizen yet, so while he is a conservative, that doesn't make him a Republican.


http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/10/free-at-last.html

He endorsed John Kerry in 2004.

[AtomicKitten]

81. LOL! You are correct! Recently he did identify himself as a libertarian to Chris Matthews.

He endorsed Kerry in 2004 and Obama in 2008. However, as you pointed out :) he can't vote, in fact, I still can't find evidence he's a citizen.

From Wiki:
Sullivan has often expressed his desire to become a U.S. citizen, but was barred for many years from applying for citizenship because of his HIV-positive status. Following the statutory and administrative repeals of the HIV immigration ban in 2008 and 2009, respectively, Sullivan announced his intention to begin the process of becoming a permanent U.S. resident and citizen.

From this http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1097">interview in 2006:

Quote:
LAMB: When did you first vote in this country?

SULLIVAN: I can’t vote.

LAMB: But you said you voted for Kerry?

SULLIVAN: I said I endorsed Kerry.

LAMB: Oh, you endorsed Kerry.

SULLIVAN: It’s a terrible thing. I’m here on a recurring visa and unfortunately my HIV status bars me from becoming a citizen even though I qualify. So I am – that is the situation.

LAMB: Explain that.

SULLIVAN: It’s the law, unfortunately, and …

LAMB: You’re HI – what are you HIV positive?

SULLIVAN: Yes, and that bars you from becoming a citizen of the United States.

LAMB: Why?

SULLIVAN: Because they think it may spread disease within America if you allow people into the country with HIV even though I contracted it after living here eight years. But that’s the law and I wish I could become a citizen but under the current law I cannot I’m afraid.

[babylonsister]

85. He's not yet, not for lack of trying...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Sullivan

Sullivan has often expressed his desire to become a U.S. citizen, but was barred for many years from applying for citizenship because of his HIV-positive status.<13><14> Following the statutory and administrative repeals of the HIV immigration ban in 2008 and 2009, respectively, Sullivan announced his intention to begin the process of becoming a permanent U.S. resident and citizen.<15><16>

[Number23]

87. Woah... so he is unable to become a citizen because he has HIV

even though he CONTRACTED HIV here in America??!

Goddamn. I apologize for my inartful response but that's truly the only word I can think of after reading that.

[FrenchieCat]

66. Yep.

Exactly.

[voteearlyvoteoften]

80. rec

[La Lioness Priyanka]

86. the left should take every word of barebacking sullivans thoughts very seriously. nt