Monday, March 01, 2010

Good Liberals

I'm adding this in reference to Rob's post below. It's "Ralph Nader Was Right About Barach Obama," by Chris Hedges, writing at TruthDig.Com. All of it should be read, for its clarity and powerful prose, and here's the link.

It includes:
"The timidity of the left exposes its cowardice, lack of a moral compass and mounting political impotence. The left stands for nothing. The damage Obama and the Democrats have done is immense. But the damage liberals do the longer they beg Obama and the Democrats for a few scraps is worse. It is time to walk out on the Democrats. It is time to back alternative third-party candidates and grass-roots movements, no matter how marginal such support may be. If we do not take a stand soon we must prepare for the rise of a frightening protofascist movement, one that is already gaining huge ground among the permanently unemployed, a frightened middle class and frustrated low-wage workers."

Yes, and we will wring our hands and feel betrayed and wonder why the earth is shifting under our feet, but we'll never, ever blame Obama because we're good liberals and he's--.
Well, he is, isn't he? Or at least, half.

9 Comments:

At March 01, 2010 9:09 PM, Anonymous Jenny said...

Eh, I think weaver has a good point here: http://www.tinyrevolution.com/mt/archives/003172.html

 
At March 02, 2010 3:21 AM, Blogger Mimi said...

Jenny, the last part of the link was cut off and I'd like to read it. Please re-send. Thanks.

 
At March 02, 2010 7:11 AM, Blogger Bob In Pacifica said...

So who are the scairedy cats? The average liberal on the street, liberal politicians who fail to change things, Obama, Rahm Emmanuel? Who is complicit and who is cowed? And what's the rationalization for where the line is drawn?

If liberals caved in on FISA, why did conservatives cave in on FISA too? Why aren't conservatives scairedy cats too? Or are conservatives always complicit?

If Ralph Nader was right, did he have the sense to know that running in 2000 helped put Bush into the White House? Does anyone here think that there is no difference between Dubya and Gore?

If being a liberal is bad, what is good?

 
At March 02, 2010 8:02 AM, Blogger Charles F. Oxtrot said...

Bob in Pacifica, if you're not working satire, I pity your ignorance. Everything in your comment was wrong, bubba. Everything.

 
At March 02, 2010 8:36 AM, Blogger Mimi said...

I got it, Jenny, thank you.
And thank you, Charles.

 
At March 02, 2010 9:44 AM, Blogger rob payne said...

It’s very nice to see you posting again Mimi and thanks for the link to Chris Hedges, I couldn’t agree more. I think that Obama’s popularity with liberals is what makes Obama a very dangerous person. It allows Obama to get away with Murder, literally.

 
At March 02, 2010 12:01 PM, Anonymous Jenny said...

Here you go:

http://www.tinyrevolution.com/mt/archives/003172.html

and here's the quote:

"Hedges confuses liberals with leftists (liberals didn't pick coffee in Nicaragua - they bitched about Ortega closing down quisling newspapers); activism with charity; sympathy with empathy; and wanting to change an unjust system with wanting to hang out with its victims at a giant pity party.

You don't have to love the poor to want to abolish poverty."

 
At March 02, 2010 2:57 PM, Blogger Mimi said...

You're a gem, Rob. Thank you.

 
At March 02, 2010 6:31 PM, Blogger Bob In Pacifica said...

C.F. Oxtrot, if liberals are bad, who is good? This is a serious question. I'd like an answer because I don't think your pity does much to clarify things.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home