Sunday, October 11, 2009

Michael Moore: Get Off Obama's Back

Michael Moore has been rather hard on Barack Obama, due to the lack of progress on progressive issues.  He’s had a change of heart.

michael_moore Last night my wife asked me if I thought I was a little too hard on Obama in my letter yesterday congratulating him on his Nobel Prize. "No, I don't think so," I replied. I thought it was important to remind him he's now conducting the two wars he's inherited. "Yeah," she said, "but to tell him, 'Now earn it!'? Give the guy a break -- this is a great day for him and for all of us."

I went back and re-read what I had written. And I listened for far too long yesterday to the right wing hate machine who did what they could to crap all over Barack's big day. Did I -- and others on the left -- do the same?

We are weary, weary of war. The trillions that will have gone to these two wars have helped to bankrupt us as a nation -- financially and morally. To think of all the good we could have done with all that money! Two months of the War in Iraq would pay for all the wells that need to be dug in the Third World for drinking water! Obama is moving too slow for most of us -- but he needs to know we are with him and we stand beside him as he attempts to turn eight years of sheer madness around. Who could do that in nine months? Superman? Thor? Mitch McConnell?

Instead of waiting to see what the president is going to do, we all need to be pro-active and push the agenda that we want to see enacted. What keeps us from forming the same local groups we put together to get out the vote last November? C'mon! We're the majority now -- the majority by a significant margin! We call the shots -- and we need to tell this wimpy Congress to get busy and do what we say -- or else… [emphasis added]

Inserted from <Huffington Post>

Upon reading this, I stopped to ask myself if I have also been too critical of Obama.  I decided I have not, because I have never put him down.  I have criticized specific things, which I consider mistakes, while standing behind him.  As Vigilante likes to say, I’m in his corner, just not in his pocket.

The election of Barack Obama represents the best opportunity for real change we’ve seen in many years.  Will we whine like Repuglicans and do nothing?  Perhaps “earning” his Nobel Prize isn’t such a bad idea, after all.  It’s up to us to earn it for him.

9 comments:

MadMike said...

Good for Michael! He saw the light. Then again he does have a great first name.

Jo said...

Tom, why are Americans so afraid to criticize their politicians? Obama has not lived up to the high expectations that he offered you folks. No one can argue that he has. He has not. He seems to be bogged down in some sort of ennui. He speaks well, and he is a great speechifier.

It's a bit like everyone afraid to point out that the Emperor has no clothes.

I agree with Michael Moore when he says, "We need to tell this wimpy Congress to get busy and do what we say -- or else…" But didn't you elect Obama to do that for you? And is he doing it?

I think, given another ten years of seasoning, Obama may have been the right man for the job, but right now I don't think he has the capabilities to live up to the expectations that were placed upon him.

He did not deserve the Nobel Peace prize, under any circumstances whatsoever.

But ... that is just my opinion as a Canadian looking across the border at the U.S.

It's a shame that your country has become so polarized, because it binds your hands. You should be able to be critical of your President, without automatically being labelled a Republican for doing so.

charles moore said...

Well Jo, as a Canadian, keep your opinions to yourself as it is obvious that you do not understand US politics.

If you have followed any of the hoopla and uproar about the health care reform, you would realize that Obama can not single handedly command the elected people in the Senate and House to do one thing or another. Each elected member is supposed to represent the people who elected them, but unfortunately big egos get in the way and we have a large number of Republicans who will do anything in their power to bring the president down; even to the extent of voting against what is best for the country.

Our president is not elected to be a dictator; the people we should go after are the other elected people who are supposed to represent our interests.

Jo said...

"The people we should go after are the other elected people who are supposed to represent our interests."

Charles, didn't you elect Obama?

And yes, I do understand US politics, probably more than you realize.

By the way, you just reiterated what I said in my comment, that you country has become polarized. And I also understand that Obama did not deserve to win the Nobel Peace prize, no matter how you slice it.

TomCat said...

I just woke up and I'll be back to answer comments in a bit, but something has to be sight now. Charles, I appreciate your participation, but here, everyone has the right to express an opinion. Though we may disagree with each other's opinions, we treat each other with respect here. That does not include telling someone, in effect, to butt out. Josie is a well known friend here who spends more time studying US politics that 95% of the Americans I know personally. I disagree with her opinion of Obama, but I welcome it. I agree with your opinion that we should go after the elected senators and representatives that represent their contributors, not their constituents, and I welcome your opinion too. OK?

Josie, when I compare our PResident with the monster who used to occupy the White House, I feel blessed. But that does not mean I feel afraid to criticize him. I have criticized him repeatedly, for example on his appointments, his futile attempts at bipartisanship, and his foot dragging on progressive issues.

Mike, on Michael's first name, ptuiffffffffft!! ;-)

I guess I commenter here after all. Be back after research.

charles moore said...

TomCat,

It is your blog and you certainly have the right to make the rules.

However, this discussion(?) seems to be going in circles. Jo said:"Obama has not lived up to the high expectations that he offered you folks. No one can argue that he has. He has not. He seems to be bogged down in some sort of ennui. He speaks well, and he is a great speechifier."

She then agrees with Michael Moore who said:
"We need to tell this wimpy Congress to get busy and do what we say -- or else…"

How can Obama be criticized for what the "wimpy Congress" is not doing?

Again, I reiterate, Obama is not a god or a dictator and he can not shove things through when the GOP is doing everything possible to thwart him. It is not Obama's fault. Without their cooperation and the cooperation of people in his own party, his hands are tied.

With this in mind, Jo's argument makes no sense and simply goes around and around.

As for his winning the Nobel Peace Prize, it is not about what he has accomplished but the hope and promise for a new beginning for the US and it's place in the world.

After reading this, don't bother to respond, criticize or chastise. Simply delete the posting as you see fit. You have a good site that I was pleased to discover, but I will not be visiting it again.

TomCat said...

Charles, the only thing in your comment that I objected to was telling another reader, "keep your opinions to yourself". The policy here that we respect each other, even when we disagree with their opinions is clearly stated in the header here. I certainly welcome your input and hope you will return and abide by the policy here.

flying dog said...

I think what the Nobel Prize Committee did when they gave President Obama was reward the man for opening doors that had been shut for too long. Often the first steps can be the hardest to take and the Nobel committee recognizes the fact and has announced to the world that it will stand beside the man or any man who is finding ways to reduce tensions in the world.
I think it's wrong to speculate that he doesn't deserve or hasn't earned the prize. If a list of past winners were studied would all have deserved it at the time of their award? Who's right is it to decide that? If I recall there is not even a requirement that the award be given every year.
The man who is perhaps the most influential in the world is choosing to open doors, to open lines of communication and to reach out with an open hand to those who will unclench their fists. This, to my way of thinking is how peace is initiated and this is the right time to begin the process.

TomCat said...

Welcome dog. Cat here. :-) Thanks for your comment. I found it quite astute.