Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

"I Won": His Will Be Done.

Damon's picture

Now, it is not odd to hear a politician speak in the first person. It's even less odd to hear a president speak in the first person. And, it makes me good to see my president growing a backbone. What betrays all of his talk of "we", though, is when our president speaks of Democratic wins in November in the first person as if they were all his own when his party's leadership is literally seated. right. next. to. him:

At one point in Friday's meeting in the White House's Roosevelt Room, GOP Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona objected to a proposal to increase benefits for low-income workers who do not owe federal income taxes.

Obama replied in a friendly but firm way that an election had been held in November, "and I won. I will trump you on that," according to several people briefed by participants who took notes.

Again, I'm glad Obama shut Kyl down at the get-go. Really, I appreciate it, especially since Kyl was trying to steamroll low-income workers. But, weren't we supposed to have won in November, too? Weren't we the ones that we've been waiting for? Furthermore, isn't it a bit more than ironic that the thing on which he puts his foot down is the thing he's already given so much away to the Republicans? It's yet more Village Kabuki, so, maybe I really don't appreciate it, at all.

This wouldn't even be worth mentioning if this were most other politicians. And, most of us, here, has known that his run was always about "all Obama, all the time", so, I'd hate for progressives and liberals to be surprised by the tone.

But, this is a reminder to those progressives that were fooled: He won, and His will be done. You can only pray and hope, like the religious do to their respective gods and godesses, that his will be your own.

So, let you all hope then, that, "L'État, c'est moi" is actually closer to "L'Etat c'est nous" (is it "nous" or "nos"?). Hell, I'd even be down with an Imperial "We".

Just sayin'...

0
No votes yet

Comments

chicago dyke's picture
Submitted by chicago dyke on

i noticed it too. it annoys me. in the scheme of things, it's not really "that important" and i'm sure lots of haters will mock you for this post. still, the presidency is not a popularity contest, and it's very sad to see such an educated, intelligent, Constitutional Scholar-President forget, even in passing and casual speech, that he is a public servant who governs by the consent of a majority. i hear that once upon a time, such ideas were actually important to Our Leaderz.

Damon's picture
Submitted by Damon on

I really tried to keep the cheekiness to a minimum (if even trying to keep the snarkiness at a maximum, if you you can do both at the same time), and I was trying to be genuine. Like I said, in theory, I'm glad to see him let the GOP know who's time it is. But, I do hope people pick up on his words.

Throughout the primaries, his campaign mocked Hillary's to no end when she claimed that Obama was more hat and less cattle. He seemed to take the "just word" accusations very personally. I just don't want his people to ever forget that he can't use "just words" when it suits him, but then pretend that words don't mean anything when they implicate him in something. "I won" isn't "just words", it was a statement that betrayed what he's really about and who he was in this for from the beginning.

One of the most defining characteristics about Obama and his politics is that he wants everyone to know who and what he's better than. As I said during the campaign, when you set yourself that high, please do not be surprised when people hold you accountable and take you to task. It's only because he asked us to hold him so highly that I do this.

If you tell us that you can walk above the surface of the turbulent sea of politics, well, then...show me. If that's an unrealistic expectation, than I'm not sure I know what's real.

Submitted by jawbone on

seemed like a good thing to say, but somehow bothered me. I didn't figure it out, but you nailed it.

This is the Democratic Party presidential candidate who did not use the words Democrat or Democratic Party during his presidential debates, of course. And as little as possible in his campaign literature, iirc. Finally, at the Democratic Nominating Convention, during his acceptance speech he did mention the party and note some of its principles.

Is this part of the hostile takeover of the Democratic Party Lambert has written about?

It seems he does see this as his victory, not necessarily a victory for the Democratic Party. Almost as if he won in spite of the Democratic Party and its fusty old principles....

And, yes, it was a diss to the Democratic Party leaders sitting there--and anywhere. Sometimes they need to be dissed--not sure this was one of them.

Repubs seem to be riding the Whaaaaaa-mbulance very successfully, thus far. The MCM seems to be taking every one of their whining complaints as Very Important News. A chance to ask Is Obama Really Bipartisan? Is he Enough of a Non-Democrat? Heh.

Submitted by Paul_Lukasiak on

This use of "I" is the kind of thing those of us with early stage BDS picked up on eight years ago....

Damon's picture
Submitted by Damon on

I noticed this from the beginning. I think I even said that. This was more of a message to those poor fools who never seemed to have gotten who Obama is clearly in this for first and foremost.

chicago dyke's picture
Submitted by chicago dyke on

they've been conditioned to, after 8 years of bushisms and tuff guy speech from rethugs, and are glad to hear it 'coming from our side' for a change.

long ago lambert predicted that it would be very hard to bring back a truly Constitutional order once we let it go, and to me this is more proof of that. and the sad thing is, many 'liberals' will go along with a further reduction of the traditional order and respect for democratic traditions, so long as the person in charge calls her/himself a "democrat."