Never before has any Democrat, not even LBJ, merited being dumped more

[Karmadillo]

http://www.counterpunch.org/levine04132011.html

From the Sublime to Two Kinds of Ridiculous
Obama the Conceder
By ANDREW LEVINE

<edit>

If only the Pelosiites in control of Congress between 2006 and 2008 had been a quarter as obstinate! They could have ended Bush's wars and, by investigating on-going war crimes, begun the restoration of the rule of law. They could even have brought impeachment proceedings against Dick Cheney and George Bush, as some Democrats, before 2006, said they would. But, true to Democratic traditions, Nancy Pelosi was emphatic: anything smacking of liberal audacity was "off the table." That order is still in force.

<edit>

Above and (far) beyond the constraints under which Obama must operate, constraints he has done nothing to modify and everything to reinforce, Obama has, time and again, begun by conceding 90% to the Greater Evil Party and then negotiated, badly, over what remains. He is about to do this again, this time with so-called entitlements -- in saner times, the third rail of American politics. It seems too that in the spirit of "deficit cutting," he will also sacrifice his pet infrastructure projects. What a small price to pay so that the rich can enrich themselves even more egregiously than they already do, and so that our perpetual war machine can continue to spread murder and mayhem without encountering pesky financial impedances!

<edit>

They might be right. If color-coded alerts were enough to sink John Kerry, think how much more potent the idea that we might soon be governed by the likes of Michele Bachmann can be. Why else are there, as yet, no calls to dump Obama? Never before has any Democrat, not even LBJ, merited being dumped more; but nary a word is said about it. As Mel Brooks' Two Thousand Year Old Man would say, "it stems from fear" – fear, in this case, that the Republicans' brand of ridiculousness will have even worse consequences than the Democrats'.

True enough, but it is relevant that Democratic ridiculousness has helped lay this Hobson's choice upon us. For this is what decades of liberal lesser evilism has come to –a political scene in which one kind of ridiculousness, the risible kind, vies with another, the kind that elicits outrage.

more...

[aquart]

1. Yes, we dumped LBJ. AND GOT RICHARD NIXON.

Those who do not learn the lessons of history...

[WCGreen]

2. Excellent Point....

[Smarmie Doofus]

4. We would have gotten Nixon anyway. Johnson was unreelectable.

Let's not draw the wrong inferences from history.

[mmonk]

9. Absolutely.

If he could have been reelected, he would have run.

[Raine]

10. Yes but Bobby Kennedy would probably have become president

instead of Nixon if he hadn't been murdered.

[Bucky]

16. No. He couldn't have gotten the nomination.

Humphrey already had the nomination locked up. Kennedy was hoping to shake loose the committed delegates controlled by party bosses, who still controlled the nomination in 1968, by all his spectacular victories in the primaries. But this was before the reforms of the early 1970s. In fact, Bobby Kennedy's murder was probably the cause of those reforms.

Kennedy would have had a serious chance in 1972, but by then Nixon was a much stronger candidate. When you steal an election and win 59% of the national vote, it means you didn't need to steal the election. But of course this thread isn't really about the tragedy that was Nixon.

[H2O Man]

23. Respectfully disagree.

There were divisions among the "party bosses." The pro-Kennedy people held more sway. After California, Senator Kennedy was in a better position that the VP.

[aquart]

42. Got anything to back that up but wishful thinking?

[Raine]

51. Unfortunately that's something we'll never know

for sure so I guess it would've been wishful thinking, *sigh*. :-(

[HereSince1628]

12. I could SWEAR I remember LBJ throwing in the towel.

True, his administration saw race riots in many major, and some minor, US cities, true too, that the anti-war, anti-draft movement was strongly underway during LBJ's administration. But the race riots WERE NOT against LBJ, and IIRC neither were the anti-war movement.

[JVS]

15. What are you going to believe, your memory or just blaming disgruntled liberals?

[Bucky]

17. Actually the anti-war movement was very much "against LBJ"

and not just because his initials rhymed with "How many kids did you kill today."

LBJ threw in the towel because of the protests, so yes it's pretty accurate to say America, as a democracy, dumped Johnson.

[H2O Man]

24. Definitely.

No question.

[hifiguy]

34. Indeed

And I think RFK would have peeled away enough delegates to get the nomination. He had all the momentum coming off his California win. That he would have beaten Nixon is, I think, near to a lead-pipe lock.

[dflprincess]

61. LBJ threw in the towel because of the strong 2nd place showing Eugene McCarthy made in New Hamphsire

after that he knew he couldn't win.

[aquart]

67. Damn straight.

Signed, Proud Volunteer for Eugene McCarthy.

And I've got the buttons to prove it.

[madrchsod]

20. you are correct...

johnson did not seek the presidency because of the war and probably a greater concern was his health. he would not have made it through his second turn. the mood of the country was`t in the democrats favor no matter who ran.

[Bandit]

25. "Hey, hey lBJ.. How many kids did you kill today"

No LBJ wasn't protested at all..:crazy:

[HereSince1628]

31. The movement wasn't to get LBJ out of office.

As I remember the anitwar protests "THE ESTABLISHMENT" was what was protested against. The protesters were primarily students and focused on things that students associated with supporting the establishment and the war, not just LBJ but college presidents, draft boards, ROTC programs, ultimately Science and Math Depts (remember the bombing at Wisconsin?), ammunition trains, the Democratic National Convention etc. The protests against the war actually continured beyond LBJ and into Nixon's second term.

And "THE Establishment" (AKA Capitalist Imperialism) was not only the target in the US it was the target of European protests against the war as well.

[aquart]

68. Where do you think the McCarthy support came from?

We fanned out all over this country. And then Bobbie Kennedy showed up and acted as if we'd done it all for him.

[Greybnk48]

32. He had a serious heart condition

and decided not to run again. There's video of him giving a speech somewhere not long after he left office and having to quickly take some nitroglycerine during his talk. It was very dramatic. He died not long after this incident.

[PVnRT]

33. That's what I thought as well

Granted, I wasn't alive at the time, but everything I've read seems to say that he gave up after losing to Eugene McCarthy in New Hampshire.

[GeorgeGist]

36. Hey, hey LBJ ...

how many kids did you kill today?

Ring a Bell?

[slackmaster]

50. Yes, and he did it "with a heavy heart."

I remember it well.

LBJ was having major health problems, congestive heart failure IIRC. I remember one of the news networks catching him in the act of eating a nitroglycerin pill while he was making a speech. They played it over and over in slow motion.

[elocs]

18. I thought I remember from that election that 1 more vote for Humphrey in each ward

would have won the election for him. There's a lesson in that as well. But then LBJ didn't get dumped, he jumped.

[Bucky]

59. What state are you talking about?

Usually when people talk about electoral what-ifs, they're speculating on Illinois (which has 50 wards, but only in Chicago). If that's what you're thinking about, then you're wrong. Nixon won Illinois by 2.9% of the vote (135,000 votes). It would take 1.5% of Illinois voters, over 65,000 people, to switch votes from Nixon to Humphrey for HHH to win that state. Even if that happened, Nixon would still have won the electoral college. Nixon won the EC 301-191-46. If Illinois's electors flipped to Humphrey, it'd be 275-217-46 and still a Nixon victory.

Maybe what you meant was that if one vote per precinct flipped from Dick to Hump, Humphrey would have won the popular vote. That might possibly be true--Nixon only won the popular vote by 510,000. Are there really half a million voting precincts in America? That number seems pretty high to me. In any case, the only scenario I can find in which Humphrey could win with minimal vote gains is this: If HHH had got 223,000 extra votes in California, 135,000 extra in Illinois, and 21,000 extra in Missouri, it would bring him up to 269 EC votes, one shy of victory. So after doing that, he'd still need to win one more close state to reach that magic 270 and win the election.

1968 was a close election, but it was a decisive win for Nixon. Had Bobby been in the race, instead, I seriously doubt he would have picked up more votes from the disaffected poor to offset all the votes from the south and from conservative Dems that his nomination would have scared over to George Wallace. If he was ever going to get elected, it would have to come in 1972 and only then if he'd dramatically improved his capacity for mending fences with people he periodically got into grudges with.

Don't get me wrong; Bobby was awesome. But he was a fighter and a truth teller, not a uniter. One reason he didn't last long in LBJ's cabinet was that, contrary to Johnson's standard for hiring subordinates, Bob Kennedy was much more comfortable being on the outside of the tent and pissing in. We could use a few more like him these days.

Results are here ==> http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/u/usa/pres/1968.txt

[elocs]

73. Not a state, the nation. n/t

[joeybee12]

37. Wrong...LBJ dumped himself...nt

[markpkessinger]

39. For all his faults, Nixon was further to the left than Obama on domestic policy! n/t

[Carolina]

44. the Vietnam War and LBJ's

desire not to be the first POTUS to lose a war doomed him.

But he was a far greater POTUS than some give him credit for: Civil Rights, Great Society, Medicare, Medicaid.

Obama isn't even worthy of being compared to Johnson.

[Taverner]

45. Yes. You are 100% correct.

[EFerrari]

47. I think you're misremembering the facts of that election. n/t

[Obamanaut]

48. Here's a link to a short article on the 40th anniversary of LBJ dumping himself ->

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/30/opinion/op-jones30

<snip> Forty years ago tomorrow, President Lyndon B. Johnson shocked the nation with his televised announcement that he would not run for another term as president.

"I shall not seek, and I will not accept, the nomination of my party for another term as your president," he said on that night in 1968.

[quinnox]

3. If Obama proposes to cut bedrock Dem programs like medicare

and social security, he will lose badly in 2012 anyway.

Primary him is the only answer. If Dems lose anyway, might as well be with a candidate that actually represents them.

[Smarmie Doofus]

5. +1 That's what the primary system is *for*. If we don't use it....

...especially THIS time... we should get rid of it and just set up a 3 party system to reflect evolving political realities.

What's going on in my name as a DEM in DC is not something that I recognize and not something which I will ever approve of.

[cali]

7. yes, yes. just wave your little magic wand.

[wake.up.america]

6. Sadly, it might come down to picking the lesser of two evils. n/t

[Obamanaut]

13. It usually is, and often we pick wrong. nt

[cali]

8. this article is so full of shit.

and yeah, Obama is someone I'd rather not have as the nominee, but lesser evilism is preferable to the alternative.

[BlackHoleSon]

40. Lesser evilism

is what has gotten us to this point. How much farther down the lesser evilism trail are you willing to travel when you know that sanity was about 8 forks in the road back? Good for you that you live in Vermont, but most of us can't depend on our states to buffer the incredible damage being done by the "lesser of two evils" system.

[cali]

58. so you want to jump straight to the greater evil? brilliant.

[SidDithers]

11. Unrec for horseshit...nt

Sid

[Gravel Democrat]

14. ^^^

Elephonky: A GM (D) cell was finally successfully inserted into a GM (R) cell
(or vice effing versa)giving the world a GMORD.
Everything but a conscience!

[Carolina]

46. loved Mike Gravel in the 2008

Dem primaries but the media treated him dismissively -- no surprise.

Still, of all the Dem candidates, he was the true patriot. Clinton, Biden, Edwards, Dodd were all DLC and voted for IWR. Richardson and Kucinich were okay but Gravel had a record of speaking truth to power. Too bad men like him no longer succeed in politics :hi:

[Sanity Claws]

19. I sent the unrec fairy to this post

I apologize to her for having to see such shit.

[uppityperson]

38. It's ok, simply doing my job

[JoePhilly]

21. OBAMABAD OBAMABAD OBAMABAD OBAMABAD OBAMABAD OBAMABAD

That's the core message from the right and the left ... intended to drive down moderate Dem turnout.

[Maru Kitteh]

69. Actually it's the broken-ass record played repeatedly by this same poster

If a new poster were to show up and post the same things, they would be handed a pizza for their unrelenting and oh-so-obvious efforts in no time.

[Douglas Carpenter]

22. the simple reality is the political/economic mechanism is simply not going to allow anyone anymore

progressive than Obama (as limited as that is) to become a viable candidate, much less win the Presidency and increase social-democracy. It simply isn't going to happen because capital now has virtually unlimited power in today's global economy. State sovereignty over economy has basically been lost.

Even if the Socialist Party came to power with overwhelming majorities in both houses - the mobility of capital with its lightning fast global bidding system for the cheapest possible labor cost simply makes resistance to these forces ineffectual - much less the ability to actually progress forward or even backward to the good old days of the New Deal and the Great Society.

We are now at the mercy of unrestrained global economic power and there is nothing we can do about it.

[deutsey]

26. I think you're right, unfortunately

The speech that Ned Beatty gives at the end of Network is even more relevant today than it was back in the '70s.

:evilfrown:

[eilen]

27. We don't know this until we get those voices and memes out there

I, frankly am sick and effing tired of the futilism I see expressed everywhere Democrats happen to gather. Honestly, spinelessness isn't only found in the Oval Office and the Congress.

Your party is the establishment. You don't even have to fight for recognition and permission to enter. Flex a muscle someone. Stand up.

[ladjf]

29. Yes.

[ladjf]

28. If there is "nothing we can do about it" we might as well all go out

and commit suicide. I think there is something that we can do about it.

[Douglas Carpenter]

30. we can do our best to minimize the damage and hold on and hope that somehow or other the tide will

change. Eventually the astronomical cost of fuel will almost certainly lead to astronomical cost of shipping and once again labor cost will cease to offer capital the kind of mobility it currently enjoys. I suppose we can try to develop in society the ideological foundations for a just society - for when the situations changes and conditions are different.

In the mean time we can do - as it says in the Bible, "Eat, drink and be marry - for tomorrow we will die."

[ladjf]

35. Regarding fuel cost: A increase of a say 25% utilization of

alternative energy, i.e. wind, solar, geothermal, biomass and others, would dramatically lower the price of fuel due to decreased demand. That 25% share would move up to 50% or more within another 10 years. That would solve a lot.

The debt situation: Is directly caused primarily by the fact that the super wealthy are not paying a reasonable rate. Already there are national polls showing up to 81% of Americans feel that the rich should pay more taxes. At some point in the not too distant future, so many Americans will fully understand that their biggest problem isn't certain cultural issued, i.e. abortion, prayer in schools, family values, but that fact that their standard of living is being driven into the ground by the greedy rich. The rich should and must pay their fair share. They will never agree to it but, so what, if the President and Congress decree it, it will be done and the budget crises will end.

3. Get out of Afghani stand and Iraq, close 60% of our bases, reduce defense by 60%.

Things things seem impossible right now. But, the "pot is boiling" and soon there will be enough
enlightened and angry Americans to do something about.

Do loose faith in the American people.

[Douglas Carpenter]

53. those are all great ideas - but they simply are not going to happen - at

least in the foreseeable future. The power of unrestrained capital will simply overwhelm such efforts. That could eventually change - but not in the foreseeable future.

[flamingdem]

41. Why are you posting this Pro-GOP tripe here at DU, disgusting nt

[bluestate10]

55. I wonder about the poster's real political position.

What is more effective than taking advantage of the Obama haters on the Left that populate DU. One mole can do much damage, I am sure more than one are on DU.

[WildEyedLiberal]

43. Unrec for horribly biased, unreliable source

Counterpunch is as reliable as Newsmax, and even more histrionic. Unrec.

[livetohike]

49. Unrec for B.S. of an article n/t

[Avalux]

52. This is a crap article. I'm sorry I wasted my time reading it. n/t

[bluestate10]

54. Show seriousness. Contribute to the maintenance of DU.

I am endlessly amazed at how some of the most virulent anti-Obama posters have no contribution star beside their handle. Make this poster wonder where they really stand in the political spectrum. Don't bother using the standard issue return that I am attacking your character, because I am not, I am seriously wondering.

[Maru Kitteh]

70. a new poster doing this so incessantly would have some pepperoni and cheese.

[ThomWV]

56. I became an Independent in December after he sold out on the Bush tax cuts

That was the last straw for me, and I've voted for every Democrat who has run for President in every election since and including 1968. I absolutely will not vote for Obama again and so I'm hoping there is a serious Primary challenger that I can support, otherwise I'll have to either give my vote to a fringe party or just leave the vote for President blank. But as I said, I could easily support a Democrat who might challenge him.

[Ihavethechoice]

57. This a crap post

the President always stated we must do this together,all the
progressive voices demand that of the human being,in a
Democratic society we have the right to decide, bs aside. Stop
talking about want the Pres is doing or trying,who is stopping
the Pres and the the rest of us. Their are some that always
talk about the children,grand and great-children pay them now
not in the future.No one will take my medical-health insurance
I paid in,no will take my retire plan (SS) I paid into.I am a
military retire,me and my wife,my children(2)and
grand-children(6) all scarified,worked hard for all Americans,
no one will disrespect the poor and elderly because most us
have been there or will be. What is the fight about. From the
human experiment, what the hell is the fight about. As a
people in this land that is not ours, what is the fight about.
I will fight for all our children,they will be
educated,feed,housed,protected from any persons that believes
that the promise of the Constitution and the right to live
with dignity and peace. We the people made that possible for a
whole lot of bigots,hater and a whole lot
criminals.LBJ,JKK,RFK,MLK,Nixon, Eisenhower,Trumen,Roosvelt
all knew of the human condition,all of them did what the could
with the best they with is every American. We know want the
cause is and how to fix it. I hope I stated my intentions,I
will do what ever to defend,protect my family that is everyone
on the continent. Peace and Love  Solidarity  

[ddeclue]

60. To be FAIR.. LBJ actually accomplished quite a lot.. CRA, VRA, Medicare..

Obama hasn't..

He can't quite seem to summon his inner LBJ.

[dflprincess]

62. True

the programs he started under the Great Society and the War on Poverty were incredible. One of history's great tragedies will be that all the progress he could have made with those programs was destroyed by Vietnam

[StevieM]

63. I don't think Obama deserves to be dumped and I don't think LBJ deserved to be dumped (eom)

[blue neen]

64. This is total crap and shouldn't even be posted on DU.

Unrec 1000 times.

[kiranon]

65. Agree. n/t

[Maru Kitteh]

71. +1000 X10^10

[Tx4obama]

66. unrec.

[FrenchieCat]

72. So you like that Paul Ryan Proposal.....

Obviously.

Being more passionate about a personality than one is about the issues,
and being willing to have what one has claimed they "cared" so much about,
more than likely having them being blown to smithering just to make a point
about Obama is childlike and quite selfish.

[mfcorey1]

74. unrec for convoluted reasoning. nt