Carping Schmarping

Andrew Sullivan writes:

But the truth is that these forces have also been so passionate, so extreme, and so energized that in a country reeling from a recession, the narrative - a false, paranoid, nutty narrative - has taken root in the minds of some independents. Obama, under-estimating the extremism of his opponents, has focused on actually addressing the problems we face. And the rest of us, crucially, have sat back and watched and complained and carped when we didn't get everything we want. We can keep on carping if we want to. But it seems to me that continuing that - as HuffPo et al. appear to be doing - is objectively siding with the forces of profound reaction right now.

Don't get me wrong. Criticism is still vital. I'm not going to give up on advocating marriage equality or a carbon tax, rather than cap and trade, or for an independent investigation of Bush era war crimes. I think pushing Obama to a more populist position on banks is well and good. But given the alternative, I am going to step up my support of this president in the face of what he is confronting, even when he is not exactly doing everything I want. In my view, you should too.

Sullivan is wrong twice in the above two paragraphs, in my opinion.  First of all, in saying that Obama "has focused on addressing the problems we face."  And two, that criticizing Obama is "siding with the forces of profound reaction."

Obama has failed to address the problem of the banks, which is a substantial failure, due primarily to his failure to select the kind of truly reforming economic advisors that we needed.  Why should we support his pathetic and counterproductive economic policies?  In fact, he now apparently realizes he was wrong and is beginning to move in the right direction.   I applaud that and will support that.  But I will not support any 'corporatist' policies that don't support the people.  And it shouldn't have taken the kind of political reversals he's experienced to bring him to this point.  Wasn't 'change' and reform what he ran on and for?

Criticizing 'your man' should never be seen as siding with the enemy.  If more Republicans had criticized the Bush administration early on, maybe we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place.  It is simply a matter of 'speaking the truth in love.'  The truth is more important than mere loyalty.

And since when is looking out for the average person by holding the large corporations and banks accountable 'faux-populism' (a word Andrew uses later in his post)?  It's like you're either a pitchfolk waving 'populist' or you're a 'corporate' Democrat.  I thought Democrats distinguished themselves from the other party by being for the average citizen and not just supporting the rich and elite.

Furthermore, Sullivan seems very happy to 'carp' about the Obama administration when it comes to gay issues or torture or things he's really concerned about.  But the fact is that Andrew is basically an economic ignoramus.  He didn't predict the crisis, and he doesn't seem to care much about the causes or the cures.  On economics, he needs to leave the thinking (and criticizing) to others.