Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Thursday, July 9, 2009

Barack Reagan

Posted by on Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 9:49 AM

Via Americablog:

A group of 26 AIDS activists chained themselves to each other in the Capitol Rotunda on Thursday morning, startling visitors, shutting down the landmark area and prompting their arrest by Capitol Police.

The group, which was protesting President Barack Obama’s failure to get rid of a ban on funding needle exchange programs, arrived at the Rotunda around 10 a.m.

Obama said during the campaign that he supported needle exchange programs... but his budget explicitly bans any funding for needle exchange programs. The administration's spokesperson says that Obama wants Congress to act—which sounds familiar, huh? Too bad the president doesn't have the authority to do anything about anything.

Broken campaign promises are aggravating enough. Having to listen to the president pretend that he's powerless to do anything about anything—he can't keep his promises because he's just the president—makes it so much worse.

 

Comments (50) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
Pepper St. Tort Reform 1
When I think about crying tears of joy on election night, I want to go back and punch myself in the face.
Posted by Pepper St. Tort Reform on July 9, 2009 at 9:52 AM
2
Obama has grown Tremendously while in office...
Posted by GOP on July 9, 2009 at 9:54 AM
boxofbirds 3
Obama wants Congress to act


Was Obama always this passive-aggressive? Sounds like he's a politician from Seattle, not Chicago.
Posted by boxofbirds on July 9, 2009 at 9:58 AM
4
Wasn't Obama your boy, Dan?
Didn't you endorse him?
How's that working for you?
Does it ever occur to you to shut the fuck up because you may not know what the fuck you're talking about?
About anything?
Posted by CaliHomo on July 9, 2009 at 9:58 AM
5
Having to listen to the president pretend that he's powerless to do anything about anything—he can't keep his promises because he's just the president—makes it so much worse.


I know, right? It's like Bush -- he promised to keep the wars in the Middle East going and after he was elected he just did it. He didn't ask for Congressional authorization. He just did it! Because he was the President, man.

Obama needs to take a page out of Bush's book. But just for stuff we believe in. Not for the war or torture or any of that stuff.
Posted by Judah http://www.suoxi.net on July 9, 2009 at 10:04 AM
6
Reagan? You really get dumber every single fucking day, Dan.
Posted by Leave the politics to those of us with intellect on July 9, 2009 at 10:04 AM
STJA 7
Sounds like you're pushing for greater presidential power. While the issues are thorny, I'd love it if Obama hamstrung the presidency as an office to make Congress a little more effing responsible for the country. We saw what Bush did with presidential power. It's responsible for Obama to tone that down.

Even if we liberals don't like it.
Posted by STJA on July 9, 2009 at 10:07 AM
Keekee 8
So, I'm a bit confused here. One of the things people claimed they didn't like about Bush was his abuse of Presidential powers.

Now that it's Obama's turn, it's oKay? Wasn't our gov. set up so that Congress & the Pres. & Supreme Court work together? Have we totally forgotten that due to Bush? I hope not.

And yes, I am over-simplifying, but I thinks you get my point.
Posted by Keekee on July 9, 2009 at 10:08 AM
9
If only there were some guidance as to how the President and Congress should interact... some document or something that laid out how powers are distributed...

Oh yeah, there is...

America has grown so accustomed to an unchecked President and an ineffective Congress that many now demand more of the same.
Posted by Ackham on July 9, 2009 at 10:10 AM
10
Okay, wait.... I'm sorry... Barack REAGAN???

Oh my gawd... that is SO clever.
Posted by Ackham on July 9, 2009 at 10:13 AM
Supreme Ruler Of The Universe 11
With Al Franken's magic vote, every issue is now in the hands of the Democrats.

Posted by Supreme Ruler Of The Universe http://yrihf.com on July 9, 2009 at 10:13 AM
Hernandez 12
Hooray for broad expansion of presidential power! Oh wait, we had that a few years ago, and it sucked ass.

What Obama is doing, in terms of self-checking executive power, sounds weak...compared to G.W. Bush. That's the fucked up thing about Dubya's legacy, because now everyone thinks that U.S. presidents are supposed to act like dictators. I'm more pissed at our Democratic majority Congress. It's their responsibility to pass the laws that the president has already said he will sign. The left just doesn't know what to do with a legislative majority in this country, whether it's Washington D.C. or here in Washington state.
Posted by Hernandez http://hernandezlist.blogspot.com on July 9, 2009 at 10:15 AM
13
hey wussy libers: the president is allowed to push, hector, and cajole ongress. no one's talking about Obama using illegal powers -- it's your kind of goody two shoes fear of power, legitimate power, that keeps the left weak and ineffectual in this country.
Posted by PC on July 9, 2009 at 10:18 AM
Keekee 14
@12:
Right on!

Time to stop blaming Obama, and contact your Congress man or woman.
Posted by Keekee on July 9, 2009 at 10:19 AM
15
I think this protest is great, and I also think that Obama leaving it to the congress to legislate is the way to go.

All this stuff about "broken promises" doesn't make sense apart from AmericaBlogReality.

That said, Obama does deserve some criticism, mostly for his economic moves being far too conservative--he needs to ditch summers & geithner.
Posted by Kevin Erickson on July 9, 2009 at 10:23 AM
16
So they protested inaction by the president by demonstrating in the building that houses Congress???
Posted by bigyaz on July 9, 2009 at 10:25 AM
17
I agree with 12

Stop trying to make the President do YOUR JOB. He works on an international scale. Take some responsibility and organize citizens (posting on a blog doesn't count) and make some fucking domestic change happen yourself, if you feel it is so important. He can't do everything at once, and needle exchange programs (let alone issues of marriage) are just not as important as nuclear non-proliferation and international peace treaties.

You've got a big pulpit Dan. Stop whining and put it to good use.
Posted by Rasvajani on July 9, 2009 at 10:29 AM
Will in Seattle 18
Too bad nobody has the guts to do this about DOMA or DADT.

That said, should have been both Congress and the White House.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on July 9, 2009 at 10:29 AM
19
I'm sure I can't be the only one wondering why someone as intelligent as Dan is getting most of his analysis from a guy with a demonstrated history of transphobia and racially questionable remarks who complains that the holocaust museum is "Way too long and honestly kind of boring", and continually stirs up bogus controversies to line his pockets. Happily, it seems more people in the blogosphere are waking up to the fact that he's a dishonest opportunist.
Posted by Kevin Erickson on July 9, 2009 at 10:33 AM
gloomy gus 20
Obama's issued twenty executive orders so far. It's not like he's unwilling to use his authority on principle. Stuff he thought was urgent enough that he couldn't let it sit for Congress to keep dicking around over.

Stem cell research.
Foreign aid to anti-poverty programs that include abortion information.
Emissions and mileage standards for domestic cars.
Guantanamo closure (but retaining rendition legality).

All hot button issues, all well within Congress's purview, all of which he could've sat back and said, this is divisive and properly something Congress should do to really make the change solid.

But he didn't say that, he signed orders and the practices of the feds changed immediately.

But not DADT or DOMA.

Just sayin'.
Posted by gloomy gus on July 9, 2009 at 10:48 AM
Urgutha Forka 21
I hate to say it, but 7,8,9, & 12 are absolutely right. Obama is correct to say he can't just do whatever he wants because he's president. That said, he can and should light a fucking fire under congress's ass to do something already about the issues he's abandoning. Christ, can't Obama write legislation himself and ask congress to have one of their members submit it for him if they're too pussy to get the ball rolling?

All of this actually makes me hate Bush even more now that his complete abuse of office went unchecked for so long.
Posted by Urgutha Forka on July 9, 2009 at 10:52 AM
Cato the Younger Younger 22
I have to agree that the US Constitution (yes that pesky little document) does make Congress the more powerful of the three branches when it acts unified. And I would rather the powers of the President be seriously limited except time times of legitimate national crisis.

As much as I hate the process I would rather Obama not give us a liberal replay of Bush.
Posted by Cato the Younger Younger on July 9, 2009 at 10:57 AM
Mark in Colorado 23
More Fiercy Fraud fun!! Get used to it. This is how he operates. His picture should be included with the definition of frenemy.
Posted by Mark in Colorado on July 9, 2009 at 10:59 AM
Loveschild 24
That's what americans are aching for now, more needle exchange programs! more junkies! that's whats going to recover our economy. Priorities of Slog.
Posted by Loveschild http://www.samaritanspurse.org/index.php/articles/responding_to_haiti_earthquake/ on July 9, 2009 at 11:02 AM
Carollani 25
What a limp-dick president. So far the only thing that he's excelled at at all is diplomacy. I think he's doing a great job greasing the wheels with other countries, but he's not handing his business at home.
Posted by Carollani http://twitter.com/carollani on July 9, 2009 at 11:04 AM
26
The president is the dictator, and don't you forget it.

Aravosis is a lawyer, huh? No wonder he's spends his time writing a blog rather than practicing.
Posted by keshmeshi on July 9, 2009 at 11:08 AM
27
100% agreement with everyone above who appreciates Obama's desire to make these changes constitutionally, through the legislative process, rather than continuing the pseudo-monarchy of his predecessor.

Another advantage of making these changes via legislation, rather than declaration :If he did all these things via executive order, then it might score him some political points; but then he wouldn't have the agitators and activists pressuring Congress to make the changes permanent. Anything done via executive order can be canceled in a Wasilla minute come 2013 or 2017.

Keep the pressure on Obama, Dan -- but put triple the pressure on Congress.
Posted by END DADT NOW on July 9, 2009 at 11:17 AM
Gomez 28
Well, since needle exchange programs show a tacit acceptance for illegal heroin and methadone usage, I can sort of understand that. The needle exchange program was a fucked up idea to begin with: Here, let's help gay men use addictive illegal, deadly, addictive, body and life destroying narcotics without worrying about getting HIV from needle swapping. What.

You're losing your mind, Dan. These posts are making less and less sense.
Posted by Gomez http://gomezticator.livejournal.com on July 9, 2009 at 11:17 AM
29
Half of you people are ignorant. Needle exchange funding is not equal to extraordinary rendition or Obama's newest idea: post-acquittal detention. Obama has adopted Bush's power grab on treatment of detainees. That's what you should all read up on because it is very disturbing. The new idea from Obama is that when a terrorist is acquitted at trial the Prez can still detain him. Hooray due process! Hooray limited executive powers!

You all act as if the Prez has no power to do anything but talk. If the Democrats are going to be ineffectual, the Big O needs to get in their faces and move foward. What's he going to do, sit in his office and throw up his hands for 8 years? What a joke. You should read Robert Caro's four-vol biography of LBJ if you want to see effective, shrewd hardball. LBJ was a bastard but he got things done.
Posted by notamused on July 9, 2009 at 11:20 AM
30
After eight years of the president autocratically overriding the directly elected representative democratic legislature... yeah, I can't think of anything better than lots more of that.
Posted by K on July 9, 2009 at 11:23 AM
31
I wish everyone would just remember: what was our alternative, people? It was John Fucking McCain. So yes, Obama is being a total fuckhead, but I am confident that John McCain would be pissing us all off a LOT more right now.
Posted by shivvvers on July 9, 2009 at 11:26 AM
32
I challenge you to read up on the details of the Obama justice system and tell me again that he's concerned with executive power: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2…
None of you would approve of this if Bush did it -"the Obama administration said Tuesday it could continue to imprison non-U.S. citizens indefinitely even if they have been acquitted of terrorism charges." The disappearance of due process isn't ok because Obama is a better, sane and more reasonable guy than Bush.

And he is all 3 of the above, but why aren't we allowed to be critical of someone we voted for? I don't want Obama to fail, I want him to succeed...in getting policies I believe are important. I realize McCain and Bush were worse: so freaking what??? So everything Obama does is ok because hey, at least it isn't Bush or McCain? No. Hero worship was what killed the GOP. They defended everything W did for 8 years. I will not agree with everything Obama does. That abdicates my responsibility as a citizen. My responsibility is to push Obama and Congress to act on the policies that are important to me.
Posted by notamused on July 9, 2009 at 11:38 AM
33
" Reagan? You really get dumber every single fucking day, Dan."

I think this is a reference to that silly old trope that Reagan caused AIDS and now that Barack isn't funding needle exchange programs he must be causing AIDS too
Posted by Reader1 on July 9, 2009 at 11:39 AM
Will in Seattle 34
@31 for the god damned win.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on July 9, 2009 at 12:35 PM
michael strangeways 35
Like all recent, national Democratic leaders Obama wants to be beloved and popular by as many people as possible but especially the people in the middle of the political map, the ones that insure he'll win again in 2012...which is why he's avoiding EVERY SINGLE GAY ISSUE on the agenda.
Posted by michael strangeways http://www.seattlegayscene.com/ on July 9, 2009 at 1:24 PM
36
Dan, I have been involved in the effort to lift the ban on using federal funds for syringe exchange since about the day after Jesse Helms stuck it in as a rider.

We were inches close in the spring of 1998 when Clinton caved (and left poor Donna Shahala out to dry) and we all felt deeply betrayed.

I loved that Obama said he would lift the ban and expected him to do so shortly after his inauguration.

So do I feel betrayed right now? Not really.

For the past year a group has been working quietly, behind the scenes, to get a bill introduced by Rep. José E. Serrano (D-NY) that would lift the ban passed. The clear message from those inside the Obama administration is that this is the way they want it played. They feel that lifting the ban will have more legitimacy -- and staying power -- if it happens legislatively rather than administratively.

And they're correct.

As much as I want to win my battle now, I'll gladly take winning the whole damn shooting match later.
Posted by gnossos on July 9, 2009 at 1:26 PM
Timrrr 37

HELLO...?!? Its just been six months -- the first six outta 48 in his first term.


Do the math, Dan. That's six over 48 (i.e.: 6/48) or in other words: 1/8th.


Has one eighth of Obama agenda been accomplished? Are 7/8th of the things on Obama's list still left to be done? Well, if you say "yes" than he's right on track!


(Unless you're just a whiny bitch because all your issues aren't 100% fixed in the first 12.5 % of the term? Really, if that's what you're saying, Dan... man, that is just sooooo fucking gay!)

Posted by Timrrr on July 9, 2009 at 2:15 PM
Gomez 38
Chill, Timrrr. Dan's just being a one-issue voter right now. My hope is that other gays, as frustrated as they may be, see the forest for the trees and don't get on this bandwagon. The groundswell's beginning, and a) no one's going to accelerate it with this histrionic craziness and b) Obama can't just flip a switch right now on gay marriage without doing a ton of political damage... and quite possibly failing to enact it completely.
Posted by Gomez http://gomezticator.livejournal.com on July 9, 2009 at 2:33 PM
39
37

Don't call Dan a whiny bitch.

It's not fair.

Because a genuine whiny bitch could stomp Dan's ass into the pavement.

You'll have to come up with something much more impotent and screechy to describe Dan.
Posted by How about Santorum Sucker? no.... on July 9, 2009 at 4:50 PM
skye 40
@36 - THIS.
Posted by skye on July 9, 2009 at 5:07 PM
41
Despite the separation of powers clause, the President does have quite a lot of discretionary power to decide policy within the executive branch, which means all of the Cabinet offices. So he could, and should, lift this ban immediately.

Some of you might not like addicts, but guess what? You're paying for their health care whether you like it or not. And it's a hell of a lot cheaper to pay for a syringe than it is to treat HIV or Hep C. If you can't see this from a humanitarian point of view, think of your pocketbook. NEx is cheap and effective. It should be legal and available everywhere.
Posted by mischiefmanager on July 9, 2009 at 5:55 PM
42
The President can't force Congress to pass legislation he wants - but he *can* tell them, and more importantly, the nation, what he would like to see passed, and why. He can endorse particular pieces of legislation. And that's definitely worth something.

Letting Congress take the initiative and have the conversation by itself about gay issues or HIV or health care is precisely the way to have it die in committee where nobody is watching, and the arguments aren't heard by the people... but the lobbyists are heard by the Congress members.

I don't know whether he's playing this particular piece of legislation the right way for it to be ultimately successful, but wanting Obama to, you know, actually do something about a particular issue rather than sit around waiting for Congress to decide to do it on its own is hardly the same thing as wanting him to emulate Bush.
Posted by Mario on July 10, 2009 at 12:26 AM
43
Yes, and on the issue of syringe exchange what he appears to be doing is letting it be known to Congress that they need to lift the ban. And, slowly but surely, over the last few months the number of co-sponsors of Serrano's bill has been growing.

mischiefmanager, there's very few people in this country (less than a few hundred I'm betting) who want to see the ban lifted as much as I do. The problem with Obama lifting it through executive order is that that action can be undone by the next president (as Obama did with the Mexico City [AKA gag] rule). Additionally, Congress can turn right around and legislatively impose a ban or simply not include any funding.

By getting Congress to lift their own ban he ensures: a) that it takes another act of Congress to reimpose the ban and b) makes it more likely that funds will actually be appropriated.

As I said before, symbolically I would have loved it if one of his very first acts had been to very publicly repudiate the ban (with Bill Clinton at his side to atone for what he has called his biggest regret of his administration). But, you know what? I care a lot more about concrete than symbolism.

Posted by gnossos on July 10, 2009 at 1:22 AM
44
Go ahead.
Push and scream.
This issue will remind Americans why they need and want to keep the GOP around.
Posted by GOP on July 10, 2009 at 6:44 AM
45
Congress is busy working on the college football problem. Got that? That's our Congress. They are useless. And still not one person dares to challenge or speak of Obama's continuing the Bush policies on rendition.... Which is completely unconstitutional just as it was when Bush did it...but hey, it's only been 6 months right? Maybe he will change his own mind next year and decide to believe in due process.
Posted by notamused on July 10, 2009 at 8:24 AM
Gomez 46
Like the gay marriage issue, Obama could actively endorse that Congress lift the syringe ban except a) Congress won't because it's a tacit endorsement of narcotics use and, b) as his endorsement for gay marriage would fuel the GOP fire and set the table for a revival of the conservative christian base and a GOP Congressional takeover in 2010... which would ruin everything the Dems have spent the past 4-6 years working for... his endorsement of a syringe ban could be easily twisted among the GOP faithful as an endorsement to use drugs and Destroy Our Children's Future blah blah blah, and oh would the GOP have a political field day with that.

Just because Dan won't doesn't mean the rest of us shouldn't think ahead.
Posted by Gomez http://gomezticator.livejournal.com on July 10, 2009 at 10:05 AM
47
breaking news...just what I was talking about

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN DAVID R. OBEY 2010 LABOR-HHS-EDUCATION APPROPRIATIONS BILL SUBCOMMITTEE MARKUP
July 10, 2009

Significant Policy Provisions
As you know, this bill traditionally carries a number of "policy" riders. For the most part, this bill continues all significant funding restrictions in fiscal year 2010. For example, it continues all of the anti-abortion provisions in fiscal year 2010 without change. The bill also maintains the current prohibition on the use of funds in this bill for human embryo research. One key exception that I want to mention concerns needle exchange programs.
This bill deletes the prohibition on the use of funds for needle exchange programs. Scientific studies have documented that needle exchange programs, when implemented as part of a comprehensive prevention strategy, are an effective public health intervention for reducing AIDS/HIV infections and do not promote drug use. The judgment we make in this bill is that it is time to lift this ban and let State and local jurisdictions determine if they want to pursue this approach.
Posted by gnossos on July 10, 2009 at 4:20 PM
48
The President is SUPPOSED to be a LEADER. If he can't even lead his own party and set the agenda for the DEMOCRATICALLY CONTROLLED congress now, then yes, he is a weak-assed p.o.s. (Good luck after 2010, when Republicans are going to come back stronger than they did in Bill Clinton's first midterm.)

I suspect Obama could lead, if he chose to, but let's not forget that this is the man who voted "Present" on numerous occasions. He's a two-dimensional narcissist who just likes to play the role of someone important without taking any of the resonsibilities that come with it.
Posted by paul c on July 12, 2009 at 12:06 PM
49
Why would it going through Congress have more staying power than an executive order? The DEA was set up through an executive order via Nixon -- and that started a whole WAR.
Posted by idaho on July 12, 2009 at 1:04 PM
50
#48 is exactly right.
Posted by common sensei on July 12, 2009 at 3:19 PM

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy