Left In Lowell

Member of the reality-based community of progressive (not anonymous) Massachusetts blogs

 
2013 Candidate Questionnaire Responses!
 

November 20, 2011

Liz Warren: Elvis? Obama?

by at 10:03 am.

Yesterday, I was talking with Corey Sciuto about the potential for the music industry to create pinnacle artists, like The Beatles or Elvis. The question hinged on the music moguls shattered hegemony of music consumers. That the intertubes had diffracted marketing and delivery of music, making the base wider of “the next big thing,” but the peak lower.

Over to politics, if you will.

Liberals are stuck in a rut. The tea party wackadoos and, now, OWS have them “all dressed up with nowhere to go.” Obama talked a great game in 2008. Though, anyone that scraped the surface of Obama clearly saw the moderate that he is. Sorry, liberals. It’s not that he lied. You projected. Albeit, had Bush and 2 decades of “Crapitalism” not crashed at Obama’s inaugural doorstep, your prince may have come. But, the economy tanked and Obama doffed his glitzy white knight facade and did what any work-a-day world leader would do. Go to the middle, if not middle right.

Liberals need a white knight. Kucinich is too short and spent. Bernie Sanders won’t cut it, but they love to watch him swing and miss. Where do the liberals put the HOPE they had all ginned up by Obama?

Heaven Is a Place Called Elizabeth Warren

Even though she’s running for the Senate and not for the presidency, the early devotion to Warren recalls the ardor once felt by many for Obama. On its face, this is odd: Warren is not a world-class orator, she is not young or shiny or new, she doesn’t fizz with the promise of American possibility that made the Obama campaign pop. Instead, she’s a mild-mannered Harvard bankruptcy-law professor and a grandmother of three, a member of the older-white-lady demographic (she’s 62) that was written off in 2008 as being the antimatter of hope and change.

And yet, on a deeper level, her popularity makes perfect sense. Embracing Warren as the next “one” is, in part, a way of getting over Obama; she provides an optimistic distraction from the fact that under our current president, too little has changed, for reasons having to do both with the limitations of the political system and the limitations of the man. She makes people forget that estimations of him were too overheated, trust in his powers too fervid. As the feminist philanthropist Barbara Lee told me of Warren, “This moment of disillusion is why people find her so compelling, because she brings forth the best in people and she brings back that excitement.”
-snip

… Warren was swarmed by a trio of college students. There was actual shrieking. When I observed to Warren that she has fangirls, she replied, “I know,” with a self-assuredness that female candidates have often found difficult to convey.

“It makes me feel very responsible,” she said as she watched the young women disappear into the night. “Very excited, but very responsible.”

If I hope something, it is that Liz understands that when she lets her supporters down, that she will not fall as far from grace, but that her broad base of supporters may not recover from it.

Once bitten, twice shy, baby.”

5 Responses to “Liz Warren: Elvis? Obama?”

  1. Christopher Says:

    My objection to the President’s handling of various issues is not necessarily that he is not liberal enough, though there are times I wish he were more so. What sticks in my craw is that he caves so easily and does not fight very hard for what he himself says he believes. Many who thought he was a liberal savior latched on to the idea that he was the only one of the three major Democratic candidates, Clinton and Edwards being the other two, who opposed the Iraq campaign from the beginning. Elizabeth Warren, by contrast we have already seen put up a fight for what she wants to accomplish in government.

  2. joe from Lowell Says:

    Elizabeth Warren will inevitably disappoint that (smallish, everywhere except the internet) segment of liberals who feel disappointed in Obama.

    It has nothing to do with their performance. It isn’t possible for a political figure in our system to meet the expectations of such people.

  3. Lynne Says:

    I disagree. I suspect Warren won’t disappoint most people, those liberals who have realistic expectations (there might be a few disgruntled but I won’t likely be one of them). After all, Kennedy often had to compromise to get things done too - but liberals didn’t express disappointment in HIM, because when push comes to shove, he had a line he would not cross, and principles he lived up to.

    Obama’s problem (besides being a Clintonian right-of-center Dem) is that he has no freaking spine. None whatsoever. It’s got nothing to do with his principles, which over all aren’t THAT bad. Or rather, which could be a lot worse.

  4. joe from Lowell Says:

    I suspect Warren won’t disappoint most people, those liberals who have realistic expectations

    I agree. She will, however, inevitably disappoint that small segment of online liberals who are disappointed with Obama.

    Ted Kennedy? Ted “No Child Left Behind” Kennedy? That piece of legislation is vastly farther to the right than anything Obama has supported, but Ted remained the Liberal Lion. This has nothing to do with having more spine than Obama, but with liberals having an abiding attachment to the Kennedy brand.

    Also, the type of “spine” that would let health care reform go down, 32 million Americans not get covered, and recisions keep happening, in order to avoid compromising, is not a virtue.

  5. Lynne Says:

    Though I would say, the majority of sites like DailyKos will not be disappointed in her. A tiny minority of a tiny minority might. They are easily ignored.

    NCLB was a mistake - though, let’s be clear, a mistake based on a false positive result in TX which only came out after. Not that you couldn’t possibly foresee the problems inherent with the system from the get-go but that piece of crap was based on the so-called “Texas Miracle” which was anything but, we found out way later.

    I have to admit a dislike of the ACA, BUT - the things in it that are good are REALLY good. No preexisting conditions starting in (I think?) 2012, kids staying on parents’ coverage til 26, certain types of coverage being mandatory that weren’t before… all huge leaps forward. The fact that all those were huge leaps forward says something about bassackwards our health care system is, but it was a leap. And one the health care industry didn’t want at all.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

[powered by WordPress.]


If you are not on Twitter and want to follow our feed on Facebook, click "Like" for our FB page.
BadgermillCity logo

Pages:

Recent Posts

Search

Categories:

Archives:

November 2011
M T W T F S S
« Oct   Dec »
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930  

Other:

Email us!

(replace spaces, ['s, symbols)
Lynne | Mimi

Lowell Area Bloggers/Forums

Lowell Politics

Mass Bloggers

Politics Online

The Arts in Lowell

Trad Local Media

40 queries. 0.992 seconds