Michael Moore has a witty, "must read" column up over at his website and at the Huffington Post in which he challenges Barack Obama to replace Rahm Emanuel with–Michael Moore. "President Obama, Replace Rahm With Me: An Open Letter From Michael Moore" is a funny post and gets in digs at both Obama and Rahm.
But at its base, Michael Moore perceives Obama wrongly: Obama isn’t hostage to the right or hostage to Rahm, Obama isn’t some good guy who’s been misled. Rather, Obama’s a willing partner, even leader (he is POTUS, after all), in what his administration has done this past 14 months. Obama sold out long ago to Robert Rubin and Goldman Sachs.
First, let’s have a look at Moore’s excellent writing over at the Huffington Post which starts with:
Dear President Obama,
I understand you may be looking to replace Rahm Emanuel as your chief of staff.
I would like to humbly offer myself, yours truly, as his replacement.
I will come to D.C. and clean up the mess that’s been created around you. I will work for $1 a year. I will help the Dems on Capitol Hill find their spines and I will teach them how to nonviolently beat the Republicans to a pulp.
And I will help you get done what the American people sent you there to do. I don’t need much, just a cot in the White House basement will do.
Now, don’t get too giddy with excitement over my offer, because you and I are going to be up at 5 in the morning, seven days a week and I am going to get you pumped up for battle every single day (see photo). Each morning you and I will do 100 jumping jacks and you will repeat after me:
"THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ELECTED ME, NOT THE REPUBLICANS, TO RUN THE COUNTRY! I AM IN CHARGE! I WILL ORDER ALL OBSTRUCTIONISTS OUTTA MY WAY! IF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DON’T LIKE WHAT I’M DOING THEY CAN THROW MY ASS OUT IN 2012. IN THE MEANTIME, I CALL THE SHOTS ON THEIR BEHALF! NOW, CONGRESS, DROP AND GIVE ME 50!!"
That’s funny! I can just see the good Congresspeople dropping and doing 50 push-ups (or Michael, for that matter!).
Later in his article, Moore goes on to say this:
Well, you and the Democrats have been in charge now for over a year and not one banking regulation has been reinstated. We don’t have universal health care. The war in Afghanistan has escalated. And tens of thousands of Americans continue to lose their jobs and be thrown out of their homes. For most of us, it’s just simply no longer good enough that Bush is gone. Woo hoo. Bush is gone. Yippee. That hasn’t created one new friggin’ job.
You’re such a good guy, Mr. President. You came to Washington with your hand extended to the Republicans and they just chopped it off. You wanted to be respectful and they decided that they were going to say "no" to everything you suggested. Yet, you kept on saying you still believed in bipartisanship.
Well, if you really want bipartisanship, just go ahead and let the Republicans win in November. Then you’ll get all the bipartisanship you want.
It’s written well, Michael, and it sounds great. I especially like your P.S.:
P.S. Just to give you an idea of the new style I’ll be bringing with me, when a cornhole like Sen. Ben Nelson tries to hold you up next time, this is what I will tell him in order to get his vote: "You’ve got exactly 30 seconds to rescind your demand or I will personally make sure that Nebraska doesn’t get one more federal dollar for the rest of Obama’s term. And then I will let everyone in your state know that you wear Sooner panties, backwards. NOW DROP AND GIVE ME 50!"
What a hoot that is!
But unfortunately, Michael, you’ve made a mistake(s)[see below where you wrongly credit Rahm with the 50 state strategy]. You haven’t looked at facts. You haven’t looked at Obama’s real background. The scenario that you paint–Obama’s a good guy surrounded by bad advisers like Rahm who have misled him–is wrong. Please have a look at Bill Moyer’s Journal interview with Matt Taibbi and Robert Kuttner (see link below) and Obama’s speech before the Hamilton Project in 2006 (links below) to see the real Obama.
Obama, after all, is the guy who picked Rahm as his Chief of Staff. Just like he let the Republican Robert Gates (who was chosen by W) continue in the most important position in his Cabinet–Secretary of Defense. Just like Obama kept on almost all of W’s generals, and even promoted most of them. Remember too, that Obama wanted that great libertarian and humanist, Judd Gregg, who opposed both Obama’s economic stimulus plan and just recently a one-time $250 payment to Social Security recipients who otherwise get no cost of living increase this year in their benefits, as Obama’s Commerce Secretary.
One must dig into facts, into actions, more–Michael–to understand the real Obama. Pick up just about anything Matt Taibbi has written, or James Street’s excellent, "Obama as Predicted". Have a look at then Senator Barack Obama’s speech in 2006 at the opening ceremony of the Hamilton Project. Bob Rubin and Goldman Sachs funded the Hamilton Project and in his speech, Obama thanks "my friend Bob" and calls for more NAFTA-like agreements and cuts in entitlements. It’s not an coincidence that one of Obama’s first acts (Obama’s Geithner coordinated with Bush’s Paulson) was to support TARP 1 and Tarp 2. It’s not a coincidence that so many Goldman Sachs people are working next to Obama. It’s not just a coincidence that Goldman Sachs was one of the primary beneficiaries of Obama’s economic bailouts, either. It’s not a coincidence that Obama lied to the American public as a candidate when he said he wanted to reform NAFTA.
Nor is it a coincidence that one of the chief architects of deregulation, the guy that Harvard fired, Larry Summers, sits as Obama’s chief economic adviser. (NOTE: Both Sherlock Holmes and Hercule Poirot share something: a disdain for coincidences. The super sleuths, though fictional, were right. With Obama, one has to follow the money trail too.).
The Russian people made the same kind of mistake pre-revolution. If one looks back at history during that time, common people all thought the Tsar was a "good guy" (despite his abysmal record) and that he was misled by bad advisers. Same well-intentioned but mistaken thinking in your post, Michael. In reality, the Tsar cared about the Tsar, not "his" people. Ditto with Obama. Obama has his Rasputin only because he, Obama, chose him and continues to support him.
I know you’re a nice guy and I’ve loved your documentaries over the years. I still laugh at the scene in "Sicko" where you use the bullhorn at Gitmo asking for help! Hilarious! Any time I see a bullhorn it reminds me of your good work. And those priceless interviews on the streets with Congressmen in your documentary on "Fahrenheit 9-11". Classic stuff! Better than "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington." You outdid Capra with reality and that’s hard to do.
But since you’re a nice guy, one of the true good guys around, maybe you find it easier to believe that Obama is one too. He’s not (I’m not talking about Obama as person or as dad but as a leader). Not at least in the sense of whom he fights for. Obama was bought and paid for by Goldman Sachs and he fights for them, big banks, big insurance companies, and the military industrial complex. His record for the past 14 months makes that clear.
One thing that you got spot on, Michael, was the ending of your otherwise excellent post:
Let me be clear about one thing: The Democrats on Election Day 2010 are going to get an ass-whoopin’ of biblical proportions if things don’t change right now. And after the new Republican majority takes over, they, along with a few conservative Democrats in Congress, will get to bipartisanly impeach you for being a socialist and a citizen of Kenya. How nice to see both sides of the aisle working together again!
And the brief window we had to fix this country will be gone.
The only way to clean up the mess is not for you, Michael Moore, to take Rahm’s position, but to take Obama’s position.
Mike, please, please, for the sake of Flint and the rest of America, primary Obama in 2012. You won’t need a bullhorn then, you’d have the entire Bully Pulpit!
Then we’ll see real, not faux, change!
NOTE:
On the Hamilton Project please see these articles that appeared here at FDL:
1. "The Hamilton Project: Same Corporatist Whine in New DLC Vessels" [includes video clip with Senator Obama's April, 2006, speech: bowing and scrapping to Robert Rubin of Goldman Sachs ("my friend, Bob"); endorsing NAFTA and asking for more such trade pacts; and, asking for cuts to entitlements]
2. "Obama’s ‘Smoking Gun’: His Hamilton Project Speech Shows his Links to Goldman Sachs, Entitlement Cuts", Part 1 and Part 2
Also highly recommended for insights into the REAL Obama:
1) Bill Moyer’s Journal program with interview of Matt Taibbi and Robert Kuttner, 18 December 2009 [where a video clip of the entire show can be seen or you can read the full transcript of the program]
2) "Betrayal"–President Obama–is the Saddest Word"
3) Stanley Kutler, "The System Works, Obama’s Approach Doesn’t" at Truthdig
4) Matt Taibbi, "Obama’s Big Sellout"
5) Paul Street, "Obama, as Predicted"
SPECIAL NOTE TO MICHAEL MOORE:
In your article on your own website and at the Huffington Post, you wrongly credit Rahm with the successful 50-state strategy:
That’s certainly what he [Rahm] did in 2006. After six long, miserable years of the middle-class getting slaughtered and the poor being flushed down the toilet, Rahm Emanuel took on the job of returning Congress to the Democrats. No one believed it could be done.
But he did it. Big time.
Wrong, wrong, (with a bullhorn) WRONG! That was Howard Dean’s work and it’s also a fact that Rahm (and Obama) hates Dean for this and his other successes. That’s why Dean is not in the Obama administration. Recall also that Rahm was strategy maker for the 1994 Democratic fiasco and was nearly sacked by Bill Clinton for it!



24 Comments

Spot on with your critique. Obama is running his White House just as he wants. He is perhaps the greatest enemy of the change he promised.
Exactly, Cbsunglass. Moore is no fool and especially after his latest documentary on the financial world, I’m sure he’s well aware that Obama is more than a captive in the White House. It’s be nice if he came out and said that, though!
I’d vote for Michael Moore.
I would too. Wish he’d correct that factual mistake about crediting Rahm for the big election wins by Dems in 2006 and 2008. That was Howard Dean’s work, not Rahm’s.
Your diary is spot on, but Obama could take Moore’s “out” if he wanted to change directions and save a little face.
Not sure I understand your point. Can you elaborate on what you mean?
Nothing’s gonna happen to Obama until Social Security is on life support and just waiting to die. At that point he becomes expendable not a second before. A Black Democratic president has all the cover needed to drive the final nail in the coffin of the New Deal. Once the deed is set in stone he’s gone one way or the other.
And wouldn’t it be nice to see another Democrat who refused to follow the wishes of the country by investigating and prosecuting the prior Bush administration (Bubba with Bush I flat out refused to investigate Poppy) receive the gratitude of the criminals in the other party by becoming the subject of impeachment proceedings.
What we’ve been subjected to the past 14 months wouldn’t even make a good West Wing episode.
Great post, fflambeau. I think shekissesfrogs is saying that Moore’s musings offer Obama an “out” that he could take advantage of – if he gave a shit. Which he clearly doesn’t.
I’ve always maintained both things can be true at the same time.
It can be true that Obama agrees with everything Rahm does, and it can also be true that having Rahm in the room when decisions are made causes Obama to make different decisions than he would have made otherwise. Those things are not mutually exclusive.
And given that Rahm can be fired at any point in time, whereas Obama will be President until 2012 and likely until 2016 (just judging by political statistics), then I know which is the better target.
Agreed. Far, far too many on the left (libs, progressives whatever..) continue to operate under the delusion that Obama is somehow “being mislead” or is in reality a fire breathing liberal being held in check by some mystical white house curse.
It seems that since his election I have gone from viewing him as a good guy with good intentions….to a good guy with sketchy objectives…to a smart guy with questionable objectives…to a not so very bright guy with destructive and regressive objectives.
Rahm didn’t pick all the neoliberals, neocons, Clinton, and even Bush retreads Obama filled his Administration with. That is all Obama.
Michael Moore is funny but he shares a viewpoint that many progressives still have, and that is that Obama and the Democrats are somehow retrievable, that they can be reformed. They aren’t, and they can’t be. They are doing exactly what they intend to do. No mistakes. No misunderstandings. They are every bit against us and our goals as the Republicans. Every day that progressives cut them any slack or give them the benefit of the doubt is another day the nation’s problems are left unaddressed.
nice diary, fflambeau.
moderate with the tone, thorougly documented, footnoted, and au courant.
on the pre-revolution Russian peasants adulation of the Czar, I have heard that the phrase often was:
“If only the Czar knew!” about such and such injustice being perpetrated upon the peasants, then he would act benevolently.
as you point out, it is exactly the same credulous peasant mentality found throughout much of the (D) captured left.
Hugh has good points, and mattcarmody has an ominous one – we can see if it has predictive validity.
it does seem that Democrat Presidents who campaign on ‘Hope’ (as Bill Clinton did) are used by the system to hack away at the safety net in ways that Repubs cannot get away with, and yep, Social Security is in the crosshairs.
careerist policy wonk apologists will be needed to run interference, provide obfuscation and cover for the foreordained neo-liberal gutting of the New Deal’s crowning acheivement.
perhaps a complex, nebulous, untried “Pony Option” to “Save Social Security!” will be created, and those who say “oh for goodness sakes don’t shred Social Security, leave it alone!” will be excluded from the ‘progressive’ debate, focussing the Overton window narrowly down onto two terrible options, one of which is fake.
ha ha! through the looking glass, right?
if only.
Excellent piece. It is about time that the left sees Obama for who he really is and not the guy running for president. Unfortunately, to many elite progressives want us to believe Obama is for us but the people HE picked are preventing him from doing what he said he wld do. That is pure bs and makes me wonder if the Walshes, and Vanderhuevens, are part of the scheme. Obama is nothing more than a black corparatist democrat who talked change to get elected but intends to keep things the way they are for the wealthy. He spent 24 trillion dollars to save Wall Street and he is giving Main St 15 billion, that shld tell all of you whose side he is really on.
If he knows this to be true but refuses to say it then what does that say about him? If people like Moore believe that Obama is the problem but still peddle the belief that it is the people surrounding him then they are in partnership with him. The left needs to call Obama out on his wars and his economic policies and we need to let him know that 2012 is going to be a bloodbath also.
If only the Czar knew…..
But we know, and it becomes increasingly impossible to ignore the facts and contempt for the realities and the makers of all those facts ….
Totally right on post, fflambeau. Thanks so much.
You and others of the FDL community might want to check out the following:
Time for a U.S. Revolution – Fifteen Reasons;
by Bill Quigley (one of my favorites at CommonDreams.org in today’s listing) See at http://www.commondreams.org/print/53565.
He says it all so succinctly and dispassionately, a clear call to action. I wonder what form “his” revolution would take; what form he envisions.
His list of 15 reasons could be written by most of the FDL writers and commentators on any given day and we could probably add another 15 to the list.
I’ve been reading Dr. Quigley’s essays on Haiti’s history, present realities and the needs for a radically different future that is not dictated by the IMF, etc. and all the political and economic American and international interests that have kept Haiti emasculated for 200+ years. Dr. Quigley has a long history of involvement in fighting for Haitian civil and human rights.
Somehow, in spite of all today’s insanities and injustices, blessings to all….
Exactly correct Hugh.
Michael Moore did another delusional piece a few months ago when he wrote a column on his website (and again at Huffingtonpost) to the effect that Obama didn’t really want to be known as the war president, did he? I guess facts show that Obama does. Moore really is clueless sometimes as to what is really happening. He’s a smart guy; with him, I think he still believes in the Democrats of FDR (not realizing they’re long gone) and the system.
I believe you are correct with the saying, “If only the Czar (Tsar) knew…”
I like your terming that a peasant mentality which it really is. Thanks for your kind and thoughtful comments.
Huh? In another diary here, I question whether Obama is really in charge. I don’t think he is. For all meaningful purposes, Robert Rubin is really “the President”. True, Obama gets Air Force One, he gets the press conferences (when he holds them), he gets to eat at the White House. But the real decision maker is Rubin. Sound strange? Well, do you think that W. was anything more than a front man for Dick Chenney for the the preceding 8 years? It’s obvious that W isn’t defending “his record” because it really was Cheney’s (who is defending it).
With Rahm, Rahm is Obama’s handler with respect to issues relating to Israel and the big banks. Rahm’s dad said as much when he was chosen CofStaff: he’ll make sure Obama’s pro-Israeli. So the point (which you miss) is who really is in charge?
In my viewpoint, Obama is little more than a salesman for unpopular causes that are espoused by Rubin and the Rahm clique: the bank bailouts, ceaseless and unquestioning aid to Israel, the Wall St. bailouts, the expanding wars overseas etc. Who better to sell this shit than a likable black guy with a winning smile and a pretty wife?
I Like Mike.
Hey, it worked for Ike, ok?
Actually, Obama’s doppelganger is in the WH.
According to the news source, Le’Onion, once Obama had $550M in his campaign funds, he took off for parts unknown with the money. Of course it makes perfect sense. Why hang around for a $200K/year job.
I think it’s Rahm’s older brother, Gefiltefish Emanuel, in the Oval Office.
Let me start off with this, I’ll probably get banned from this website due to the fact I’m sure an opposing opinion doesn’t want to get heard here. LOL, but I’ll try anyway. I’m not exactly sure as to why anyone would think that Michael Moore is someone of substance. He’s a FILM PRODUCER for Christ’s sake (Oh wait can I say that here?). Some ppl act like he’s a medicine man or something. That is the joke of the year, this “change” that you speak of that you’re not getting as Obama promised did you actually believe he was going to “change” anything? Madam Pelosi has the charge and she’s in charge! She’s driving this whole administration and the sooner she move’s out of office the sooner Obama can try to get his “Change” in place. But to be honest, he’s not going to “Change” much of anything except taking a bad situation and making it worse. I’m being totally serious when I say this, for the record….He is going to be the worst president this country has ever seen of all time”. He acted like a true politician, say anything to get into office and then do nothing but what he wants’ while in office. A word to the people to elect him, you better hope things start to change and soon, the backlash from the American people that put him into office will be huge come 2012. The Democratic Party and the president will not be able to recover if something doesn’t change and soon. The worst thing that could happen is another attack, he will be blamed. At least with Bush other countries feared us and it lessoned the possibly of an attack.
No doubt about it – Michael Moore is a national treasure.
It is embarrassing to have to point this out, but of the five-hundred and thirty-five members of the House and Senate, only one man (Bernie Sanders of Vermont) has had the the sense to point out what should be a no-brainer: We need to make drastic cuts in military spending. Or, in terms that even your average right wing extremist will be able to understand:
We piss away far too much of our national treasure on things that go BOOM!
Surely England can afford to insure all of its citizens. In 2009 they did not spend (as we did) 651 billion on its military. This year their projected budget is not (as ours is) 680 billion. Think about that for a minute: That amounts to almost a trillion-and-a-half dollars every two years! For that kind of cash not only would we be able to easily afford medical insurance for every man, woman and child in this dysfunctional nation, we could start investing in our badly neglected infrastructure. And that would translate into jobs – lots and lots of them.
The phony and self-righteous “Christian” politicians that pollute the halls of Congress are never going to take seriously the words of Jesus when He said, “Blessed are the peacemakers.” Don’t hold your breath waiting for that to happen any time soon. That being the case, I have a modest proposal. Let’s cut military spending in half. If current trends continue, in 2011 we’re looking at 700 billion in military expenditures alone. Why can’t we trim it down to a “mere” 350 billion? Is that such an extreme proposal? Why do we spend more on weapons of death than we do on the life of our own country? What the hell is the matter with us?
http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com
Tom Degan
Where to begin? Michael Moore is just “a film producer”! Have you noticed that his documentaries (NOT films) are all about social-economic conditions and policies (like the actions of corporations [in "Roger" which was way ahead of its time in predicting GM's demise); Bush and the Iraq War ["Fahrenheit 9-11"]; our broken medical care system ["Sicko"]; and his latest on the bailouts? They are all designed to make people think, they get into policy makers faces (with bullhorns and microphones thrust into Congress criters faces). These are not Frank Capra films, Lostintranslation.
And yes, I did expect change, at least some of it, from the widespread promises Obama made. He lied to the nation, repeatedly, to get elected and he will last one term as a result of that and his lack of leadership.
Stupidity will not get you banned here.