Obama White House Baits "Progressive" Bloggers -Demonstrable Ignorance!

WOW! Well thank goodness I am a middle of the road independent otherwise I might be upset with what the White House just said about bloggers. .

LESTER HOLT: John what we saw in that protest today, was it simply frustration or does it represent a serious problem the President is having with an important part of his base?

JOHN HARWOOD: As a practical matter Lester I don’t think it’s a serious problem. we’ve seen and certainly Bill Clinton learned that they Democratic President can get punished by the mainstream of the electorate for being too aggressive on social issues so for now I think the administration feels that if they take care of the big issues — health care, energy, the economy — he’s going to be just fine with this group.

HOLT: But in general when yo look at the left as a whole, have there been conversations about some things they thought would have been done but haven’t?

HARWOOD: Sure but If you look at the polling, Barack Obama is doing well with 90% or more of Democrats so the White House views this opposition as really part of the “internet left fringe” Lester. And for a sign of how seriously the White House does or doesn’t take this opposition, one adviser told me today those bloggers need to take off their pajamas, get dressed and realize that governing a closely divided country is complicated and difficult.

WOW. JUST WOW! Another member of the  Political Elite Establishment (PEE) taking digs at "bloggers."  I don't have to tell my readers that  Bloggers of EVERY political persuasion aren't just a bunch of high school students popping zits in their parent's basements with one hand in a box of Apple Jacks and the other alternating between a keyboard, mouse, joystick or other places.

"I blog and work a full time job, at the expense of my own health, not to be a muckraker, but to make a difference," Spaulding said. "If someone has a different perspective and dismisses me outright, I do have a right to be angry and demand someone own their statement. Pam Spaulding

I can relate Pam, but I agree with this guy who basically says that the bloggers are being used to shore up Obama's "moderate" credentials. Apparently this guy thinks the President needs a political foil since Michael Steele is so inept ( yes my Republican readers, he's truly awful and that opinion has nothing to do with ideology. He's just so horrible at party building, the Tea Partiers had to do his work for him... which should scare the heck out of the Republican Political Establishment, but that's another post)

Pajama-Baiting: 1) You have to wonder if the unnamed Obama aide's "take off the pajamas" jibe was not a self-pitying expression of frustration but rather an intentional attempt to goad the liberal blogosphere, giving Obama some anger on the left to push back against, translating into a rise in the polls. Slate

Image if this group  the jammie wearing bloggers  FINALLY figured out that instead of commenting about the political process and engaging in political discourse, they started using the power of the internet to consolidate resources and begin to remove the political establishment school board seat by school board seat, city council member by city council member, county commissioner by county commissioner, state senator by state senator, state house rep, by state house rep, commissioners, governors, and then Congressmen and US Senators and eventually the White House itself. Stop debating with them and run and WIN!

But never you mind, the anonymous White House staffer is  right about many bloggers in one sense, they have relatively short attention spans. Its the nature of blogging. Every hour presents a new posting opportunity. Long term laser-like focus, the kind required to topple a political establishment is not one of our hallmarks.  Some bloggers still think they can "influence" the powerful by putting up badges or handing over money to people who don't even know the difference between a Twit and a Tweet when what they should be doing is using their technological advantage to begin replacing them. Check completely out of  the ridiculously expensive presidential politics and remake their local communities and states in their own ideological image, build a farm team that will eventually replace the entire political establishment. But then again... THAT's NEVER been done before.

From 1989 through 1997, the Christian Coalition wielded sizeable influence, largely in the form of the charismatic and persuasive public face of Ralph Reed, who became a commanding public voice in the news media. The perception if not the reality that Christian Coalition activists controlled local Party machinery in many locations and could reliably turn out large blocs of votes for Religious Right candidates caused many Republican and Democrat politicians at local levels to either vote as the Christian Coalition urged or else struggle with explaining their votes. The fear of being listed on Voter Guides as casting anti-Christian votes prompted politicians in moderate to conservative districts to carefully consider the positions urged by the Christian Coalition. Wikipedia

You don't have to agree with them ideologically in order to replicate their strategy. Just skip the part that involves being indicted or having a minister who sleeps with his employees as your spokesperson.

My politically inclined readers are you watching what is happening?Don't do this. Stop signing "petitions" and walking around carrying a placard. If you want to wield power, you've got to capture some power somewhere. Let everyone else sign petitions and walk around in a circle.

Bloggers can only count to possibly ONE congressional district that changed hands as a direct result of their efforts. Until they establish their own machine separate and apart of the the current political establishment, field their own team of credible political opposition and win some races in a  manner that leaves no doubt that they are responsible for the victory, they will remain the orphan child of politics with their noses pressed up against the south lawn fence as all the staffers on the other side enjoy figgy pudding while providing anonymous quotes.


PPS...Last but not least, its not the BLOGGERS that are dangerous, its the boomerang. Sure 90% of dems still approve of the President, but mainstream media has grown increasingly lazy and underfunded. So they now rely heavily on we puny little bloggers for "news." The internet now drives public discourse, NOT the editorial page of the NY Times. In fact, if you had a clue, you would figure out that that whole ACORN fiasco, isn't about ACORN at all, its about supplanting traditional media outlets as "thought leaders" and its working. Most major political discussions are shaped online. When the President won the Nobel peace prize, people didn't gauge opinion based on what a bunch of journos thought, they ran to look at the trending topics on Twitter.

Completely and TOTALLY unnecessary. I'm going back into the basement how. Where are my Apple Jacks?

Comments

[RevMamaAfrika]

Well, I attended yesterday's successful march and rally for marriage equality. I also listened very carefully at Pres. Obama's speech at the Human Rights Campaign dinner the night before. That speech, if I were a lesbian, I would have thrown my shoe at him! :( If someone has a rope around my neck, I'm not going to be patient to get the rope off.

I HOPE NO ONE IS FOOL ENOUGH TO UNDERESTIMATE OUR LGBTQ sisters and brothers; they are organized, they are organizing, THEY ARE RAISING MONEY, they are using the latest technology to organize, including blogs AND they are doing old fashioned grassroots, door-to-door organizing and they ain't playing. PERIOD. Even while many LGBTQ folks "drank the Kool-aid", many and many more are "putting down the glass to go kick some #$%". Folks need to stay tuned for an important political lesson; it will be this group to hold Pres. Obama's feet to many a fire, before it's all over. And yes, of course, in the LGBTQ human rights movement, there are African and other people of color. :) :)

[gem2001]

@ Revma Forget "movements." That's our problem online. I did the same thing and made the same mistake. I got caught up in the spectacle, the window dressing. How many times my name appeared somewhere. Its meaningless. The only thing that matters in politics is POWER and "movements" don't have political power, only politicians. Sure voters can elect politicians, but they can't directly wield power.

The White House basically called these bloggers STUPID for not being able to understand the complexities of governance.

The Political Elite Establishment will only take bloggers "seriously" when online activists stop trying to play amateur political analysts and start running campaings and winning.

[Ananda Leeke]

AMEN Gina. I feel you.

[RevMamaAfrika]

The White House folks called bloggers "stupid" because they are stupid enough to display such arrogance.

Respectfully, history is full of examples of how grassroot organizing, social justice movements help bring about social justice and change. The problem is, movement folks need to know how to organize for POLITICAL POWER, how to take it, maintain it and defend it. We must learn how to defend our gains AND have the discipline not to give up or give in for a three piece and a bisquit.

Politicians only have the power that the people/the voters give them or allow them to have. As Dr. Angela Davis said last year during the campaign, "voting is important, but we shouldn't make it a fetish." WOW! So voters must be better organized, better politically educated, increase their vigilance and discipline, etc., to get things done and keep it going. Unfortunately, some of us have short attention spans.

Lastly, I admire the organizers of yesterday's march; they are using many different skills, resources, techology, even the religious/spiritual, etc., to help them make their demands. And yes, they are also planning to run candidates, develop campaign strategies, etc. It is quite fascinating, it's exciting and I personally look forward to political pressure they will apply to Pres. Obama. Plus, they are building upon a strong history; some of the most radical, revolutionary people have been LGBTQ folks. :) :)

[gem2001]

I agree bloggers do arrogantly think power will conced to the demands of their keyboards, HOWEVER, I completely disagree with your historical comparison. Earlier generations HAD to march and organize in the manner that they did. They didn't have the internet.

To tell bloggers that they are are not leveraging their resources if they continue to mimic the patterns of advocated from a generation ago isn't a slight on previous generations. I dont' know of any bloggers getting their heads bashed in, lynched or assassinated to put up a blog post... yet.

My point is that we have resources previous generations could only have dreamed of, and we're wasting them trying to relive the 60s.

Likewise, I completely agree with grassroots organizing, but what do you think local political parties are other than grassroots organizations. but instead Blogger focus on Presidential elections because they are "sexy". They could do just as much damage focusing on state legislative races.

I just built a website for a my friend who is running for a local office. It took a couple of hours and she thought I moved mountains. We could have a massive impact on politics, but we have to pay our dues.

[RevMamaAfrika]

My sister, I think basically we are in agreement. The White House folks were dismissive of the bloggers, not caring or not realizing that many bloggers and also grassroot community organizers or are affiliated with grassroot community organizers. The fact that we now have such techology, blogs, Internet, etc., should help make doing some things perhaps somewhat easier. Now of course, such organizing for justice is never easy work; it's hard work, some of it tedious. I know folks who are long time community organizers for social justice that have a blog and/or a website, they do Facebook, Twitter, etc. They also do research, write or help write papers, speeches, press releases, design posters, flyers, brochures, pass out these materials at the bus stop, subway stations, barber shops, beauty salons, etc. All these things, these tasks are just part of their "to do list" or their tool kit. And my God yes, we all must pay some dues . . . and then some. :)

[Fred]

@ RevMamaAfrika

Actually, President Obama is quite responsive to homosexual activists, especially White ones. The number of high-ranking gays in the Cabinet and various federal agencies is a record for a President.

Now, when it comes to STRAIGHT Black people, then the President is pretty indifferent. This is especially true if the Black person is poor. Examples range from Obama killing funding for a successful school voucher program popular among DC's Black voters:

http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/0909/657267.html

To not speaking out about the murder of Derrion Albert in his hometown of Chicago:

http://politikditto.blogspot.com/2009/10/obama-to-speak-on-gay-rightsagain-this.html

So, is Obama pro-homosexual? Yes.

Is he pro-Black? Not so much.

[Fred]

@gem2001

This latest news is timely in light of the White House's remarks on bloggers:

"The Federal Trade Commission's Coming War on Bloggers"

http://gawker.com/5377517/the-federal-trade-commissions-coming-war-on-bloggers

[gem2001]

Fred always walks up in here with footnotes and citations and cross references. :)

[Yme]

@RevMamaAfrika
"I would have thrown my shoe at him! "

LOL. Our President can catch flies with his hands, I don't think that shoe is going to connect.

@Gem
"The only thing that matters in politics is POWER "

I guess that's why Barney Frank said the only thing the marchers in Washington were putting pressure on was the grass.

@Fred
I think the black community, such as it is, was a cheap date in the last election. He told the homosexual community, they would get "Don't Ask Don't Tell" thrown out and I think he will eventually. He told Jewish Americans, he would always be a friend of Israel, told Muslims...he would be more even handed than previous presidents, he told women...he would fight vigorously to uphold abortion rights, for hispanics...comprehensive immigration is next up on the plate.

He identified what change would mean to a lot of groups. For us...it's like BA says, so often. We're to depend on the knowledge that a "rising tide lifts all boats."

This isn't to say...many of us don't fit into those other categories (homosexual, women, needing healthcare) ...but I don't believe our President respects the angst the black community feels, like he feels it from some other groups.

PS. I know the civil rights movement for the LBG community (I honestly don't know what TQ stands for) is a big thing and an important thing...but for me personally, it still rings a little shallow when it's compared to the civil rights movement of the 60s.

You seldom hear many blacks making that comparison as comfortably as I heard the President make it. But, that's just my opinion.

BTW, I know we've all been wondering where Rev. AL was...he's going to help the NFL players fight Rush Limbaugh.

[RevMamaAfrika]

Right now, Barney Frank is to the LGBTQ (Lesbian, Gay Bi-sexual, Transgender, Queer) community what Ward Connolly is to our people and Affirmative Action. :(

Yes, it seems Pres. Obama took people of African descent for granted; given that his campaign ran more like a marketing campaign for a new product than an election campaign, and that many, too many of us "drank the Kool-Aid", yeah well, we got what we got, which wasn't much. But again, please let's not underestimate our LGBTQ sisters and brothers; they are taking notes and paying close attention. I told a friend of mine yesterday after the march and rally that with the LGBTQ folks paying attention, some may now get the sense, and I certainly think so, Pres. Obama is getting ready to borrow a bus to throw them under; they saw what happened to Rev. Wright, to the Black governor of New York, etc. They don't intend to be next.

The LGBTQ and Black Liberation/Civil Rights movements have much in common, especially if we understand often some of the same people were active in both. For example, Bayard Rustin was a gay man back in the day, very active in the civil rights movement AND EVERYONE INCLUDING DR. KING KNEW HE WAS GAY. Baba Rustin was the key organizer and strategist for the March on Washington, but he was not allowed to speak due to the homophobia in the movement at that time, also because Adam Clayton Powell threatened to expose Baba Rustin to the public. There were women who boycotted the MOW because no women were allowed to speak, only Mahalia Jackson was allowed to sing, though she had a history of talking about racism in a few interviews.

Now my friends and I were wondering where were our celebrities since Lady Gaga spoke. Where was Rev. Al, who has a sister who is a lesbian and promised four years ago to wage a campaign against homophobia in Black churches; Rev. Messy Jessie who has often spoke out for the human rights of LGBTQ folks; Dr. Michael Eric Dyson and Dr. Cornel West, both of them have courageously spoken out against homophobia for many years. Where was funny sister Wanda Sykes? Angela Davis? Alice Walker? Where were some of our LGBTQ and straight entertainers, athletes, authors, etc.? Were they just not asked or were they scared? :( AND MOST OF THEM BLOG AND/OR HAVE WEBSITES!! :(

[gem2001]

If I had a nickel for ever promise Al made that he didn't keep.

[Yme]

@RevMamaAfrika

Hmm...it's true, I haven't seen a lot of support from the black community, well in truth not many communities for LGBT rights.

Were they not asked? Perhaps not...I always get the impression there is some animosity between the gay community and the black community...

Wanda Sykes has been pretty outspoken, hasn't she? Or, are you saying she was missing in this most recent debate?

Sometimes I think our President is afraid of being tied to closely to the black community. Do you think these other people you've mentioned really don't want to be too tied to the LGBT community?

I mean the occassional camera shot is good and worth (it seems) pursuing, but regardless of the "movement", I think you lose the big wigs when its time to work.