raghu wrote:
> More proof that Obama is fundamentally sympathetic to a progressive way of
> thinking. If only progressives can be bothered to try and convince him..
In Chicago, where I'm from originally, people learned very quickly to
ignore what politicians _said_ and to pay attention to what they
_did_. It doesn't really matter what Obama is "fundamentally
sympathetic to" if he can't form coalitions to get behind them to
counteract the forces that are against them.
Or if popular pressure forces him to act.
It's hard to imagine Pres. Obama instituting
- end of the Iraq war when he's appointing H. Clinton as the Secretary
of State and keeping Robert Gates as Secretary of War (oops, I mean
"Defense").
It is hard to imagine him *not* ending the Iraq war. That's what he campaigned on. Also Gates is just a bureaucrat. As far as I can tell, he just follows orders and is in no way opposed to an end to the war. Maybe I am mistaken on that.
- [universal] health care [insurance] if he's gotten so much money
from the very rich and the opposition from the powerful insurance
companies has just begun. (It's a bit sad that "universal health care
insurance" has already started being watered down to "health care.")
Important not to get hopes up too much on "universal health care", but his plan does sound like a considerable improvement on the status-quo.
I don't see a real mass movement existing at this point that would
pressure Obama to shift to the left to counteract the main rip-tide
which is pulling him to the right.