White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs is in the headlines again for all the wrong reasons: calling out liberals and progressives in petulant fashion. He singled out the “professional left” and said “such people should be drug tested” He further claimed “they will be satisfied when we have Canadian healthcare and we’ve eliminated the Pentagon.” Sounds pretty much like Sarah Palin lunacy or a Nixon rant.
Robert Gibbs has a history of not only dissing progressives but of using inflammatory/Karl Rove-type tactics against progressives, liberals and the left.
In 2003, according to the New York Times, Gibbs was spokesperson for a group that smeared candidate Howard Dean using Osama Bin Laden pictures and languages like Dean is too weak and “dangerous” while saying that “Dean cannot compete with Bush on foreign policy”. In fact, the title of the article in the New York Times pretty much tells everything: “THE 2004 CAMPAIGN: ADVERTISING; New Democratic Group Finances a Republican-like Attack on Dean”.
Have a look at this post (with accompanying link to the original New York Times article on this) from poster Jezreel over at the Huffingtonpost. Great find Jezreel and here it is:
Until now, I believed the insults, contempt and disdain directed toward the “Left” by the Obama admin was a response to the Left’s lack luster response to Romney care and the pressure on the President to fight for his own progressive policy solutions to the economic, energy and health care crisis.
But tonight I was directed to a 2003 NYT article about a smear campaign against Dr. Howard Dean by what appeared to be a Republican effort intended to stop his 2004 presidential campaign.
The group behind the smear campaign used images of Osama Bin Laden in t.v. ads to invoke fear while portraying Dr. Dean as “dangerous” and too “inexperienced” and too weak on foreign policy to keep America safe. .
The ad left the impression it was paid for by Republicans. But it was in fact paid for by a new Democratic front group called; Americans for Jobs, Health Care and Progressive Values and Robert Gibbs served as spokesperson.
Per the ad:
“‘Americans want a president who can face the dangers ahead”…”But Howard Dean has no military or foreign policy experience. And Howard Dean just cannot compete with George Bush on foreign policy. It’s time for Democrats to think about that — and think about it now.”
Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/16/us/2004-campaign-advertising-new-democratic-group-finances-republi
can-like-attack.html
It is telling that Obama not only hired the clown Gibbs but keeps him in his position just as he has Rahm Emanuel. Obama too shares the Gibbs-Rahm hatred for progressives and has frozen progressives like Howard Dean out of his administration and is giving Elizabeth Warren the cold shoulder too. This is not a coincidence. Look at the Democratic corporatists and Republicans that surround Obama: Larry Summers, Timothy Geithner, Ken Salazar, Rahm Emanuel and Robert Gibbs. That is by choice, Obama’s choice.
Jezreel made another nice comment at the Huffington Post:
“…it would be impossible – literally- for Robert Gibbs to serve as Barack Obama’s mouth piece if the two men did not share political viewpoints including a disdain for Progressives. There is simply no way that Gibbs can get away with disparaging the Left – with only 84 days left before the midterms if his boss was not 100% behind him.
And it is inconceivable that Barack Obama and the members of his inner circle were not aware of Gibbs previous participation in a smear campaign against Howard Dean.
In my view, it is an inescapable fact that Gibbs was conveying the sentiments of Barack Obama in his interview with The Hill.
At this juncture, it is up to Progressives to decide the nature of our relationship with the W.H. going forward and to what extent they will support generic Democratic candidates over legitimate Progressives.”
Exactly right. A stupid thing to do with November coming up so soon but Rahm, Obama, and Gibbs have all dissed the liberal base before and will again. For myself, I will work for and contribute to progressive Democrats on a limited basis this coming election (like Russ Feingold) and work for Elizabeth Warren’s appointment to the Bureau of Consumer Affairs position. But that’s it. Obama needs to fire Gibbs and Rahm and shake up his administration or face a disaster come November.
UPDATE: Greenwald on Gibbs.
Glenn Greenwald over at his blog at salon.com has some wonderful observations up about Gibbs’s Nixonian-like rant against the left:
“You may think that the reason you’re dissatisfied with the Obama administration is because of substantive objections to their policies: that they’ve done so little about crisis-level unemployment, foreclosures and widespread economic misery. Or because of the White House’s apparently endless devotion to Wall Street. Or because the President has escalated a miserable, pointless and unwinnable war that is entering its ninth year. Or because he has claimed the power to imprison people for life with no charges and to assassinate American citizens without due process, intensified the secrecy weapons and immunity instruments abused by his predecessor, and found all new ways of denying habeas corpus. Or because he granted full-scale legal immunity to those who committed serious crimes in the last administration. Or because he’s failed to fulfill — or affirmatively broken — promises ranging from transparency to gay rights.
But Robert Gibbs — in one of the most petulant, self-pitying outbursts seen from a top political official in recent memory, half derived from a paranoid Richard Nixon rant and the other half from a Sean Hannity/Sarah Palin caricature of The Far Left — is here to tell you that the real reason you’re dissatisfied with the President is because you’re a fringe, ideological, Leftist extremist ingrate who needs drug counseling…”
Gibbs has harmed the Obama administration repeatedly most recently prior to this outburst with a statement to the effect that the GOP would make big gains in November. Greenwald continues on why Gibbs attack will be counterproductive for Democrats in the long run:
“The Democrats have been concerned about a lack of enthusiasm on the part of their base headed into the midterm elections. These sorts of rabid, caricatured, Fox-News-copying attacks on the Left will undoubtedly help generate more enthusiasm — more loud clapping — for the Democrats. I know I’m eager to go canvass and clap for Democrats after reading Gibbs’ noble, inspiring vision. If it were Gibbs’ goal to be as petulant and self-pitying as possible, what could he have done differently?
Perhaps one day the White House can work itself up to express this sort of sputtering rage against the Right, or the Wall Street thieves who destroyed the American economy, or the permanent factions that control Washington. Until then, we’ll have to satisfy ourselves with White House explanations that the Real Culprits are not (of course) them, but the Professional Left… .”
UPDATE #2: Video Clip of Gibbs Attack Ad
You can see a video clip of the infamous smear video made at Robert Gibbs “inspiration” here:
http://www.zimbio.com/Barack+Obama%27s+Press+Secretary/articles/2/Barack+Obama+Chooses+Robert+Gibbs+Press+Secretary
The above website indicates:
“After Gibbs hooked up with, and soon left, John Kerry’s presidential campaign in 2003, he was a key member of the 527 political group “Americans for Jobs, Health Care and Progressive Values.” Well who the hell are they? If you were a Dean backer in 2004 (*sigh* we sad few still willing to admit it) you might remember a particularly nasty attack ad that ran early in the primaries.
The ad zooms in slowly on a picture of Osama bin-Laden on Time magazine while questioning whether Howard Dean is qualified to handle national security. Well we have Gibbs and the “Americans for Jobs…” organization to thank for that little gem of Democratic party in-fighting. Roll the clip…”
UPDATE #3: Grayson calls for Gibbs to be Fired.
The Huffingtonpost http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/11/rep-grayson-unleashes-on_n_679060.html is reporting that Congressman Grayson of Florida has called Gibbs “Bozo the Spokesman” and called on Obama to fire him:
“I don’t think he should resign, I think he should be fired. He’s done a miserable job,” Grayson said. “He’s so far in over his head he’d have to reach up to touch his shoes.”
… I’d like to see Gibbs show some frustration over 15 million unemployed Americans. I’d like to see him show some frustration over 40 million people who can’t see a doctor when they need to. I’d like to see him show some frustration over the Republicans, who have blocked the president’s plans and his programs … They’re the opponents for him, not the liberals.”
UPDATE #4: David Sirota on Gibbs.
David Sirota being interviwed by Amy Goodman over at Democracynow.org today made some excellent observations not only on Gibbs but on Obama and his relationship with progressives:
AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to ask you, David Sirota, about the comments of Robert Gibbs, talking about—well, attacking progressives. In an interview with the newspaper The Hill, Gibbs said critics who liken some of Obama’s policies to those of former President George W. Bush should, quote, “be drug tested.” Gibbs went on to blast what he called “the professional left,” saying, quote, “They will be satisfied when we have Canadian healthcare and when we’ve eliminated the Pentagon. That’s not reality.” What’s your response, David Sirota?
DAVID SIROTA: Well, my response is that the Obama administration is obviously frustrated with its—where it is in the polls, and it doesn’t really understand what a progressive movement is, as separate from a presidential administration. …Unfortunately, President Obama, upon becoming president, put a lot of Washington insiders into the government. Those are people who are really not interested, and have never worked with, don’t really understand the value of, social movements that are independent of an administration.
Look, I’ve known Robert Gibbs for years. Robert Gibbs has worked as the spokesperson for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, the Democratic Party, in general. This is not a person who is comfortable with the idea of a progressive movement—any movement—really pushing an administration. This administration, the staffers in this administration, truly believe that they should be able to give orders to progressive organizations, progressive voters, and that those orders should be followed without question. And I think this tension between the progressive movement and the Obama administration is only going to continue, especially if President Obama does not advocate many of the progressive policies, does not fight for many of the progressive policies, that he campaigned on.
UPDATE #5: Robert Shrum says Gibbs undercut Obama message.
Robert Shrum who knows a thing or two about political campaigns says that Gibbs’s outburst not only makes no sense but that it undercut what should have been Obama’s message–the passing of a $26 billion aid package to states and teachers. Writing at The Week http://theweek.com/bullpen/column/206047/obamas-midterm-roadmapShrum makes these very good points:
…the President’s press secretary, Robert Gibbs, stepped on his boss’s story [passage of the $26 billion aid package to states]. He scorned the Obama base with a self-indulgent attack on “the professional left” for presuming to wish the President had accomplished even more than he has and for pushing him to do just that. I suspect Gibbs reflects a pervasive frustration inside the White House: Why don’t “they” give us credit for progress unprecedented in half a century? Put more artfully—we’ve done a lot, but we have a lot more to do—the point is not only right, but potentially persuasive. Instead, Gibbs mimicked the language of the far right—“the professional left” won’t be satisfied until we have “Canadian-style health care.” This borrowed smear was all the more shameful because, in fact, most progressives rallied to health reform even after the public option was jettisoned. …
Gibbs’ graceless non-apology two days later was worse than smug; it was stupid. The challenge is to enthuse the base, not abuse the base—especially in a polarized season when Republicans are far more motivated to trek to the polls.
If Gibbs hadn’t seized his wrongful place in this week’s news, and if the White House had seized on the bill saving the jobs of teachers and cops as an opportunity to signal an “on your side” message, the President might have started to shift the narrative of the midterms, engage progressives, and reach independents
Exactly correct. Note that President Obama still could make up to his base and “shift the narrative” with the appointment of Elizabeth Warren to the head of the new Bureau of Consumer Protection. Why is he waiting so long to appoint Warren? Could it be that Obama sees here as a “member of the professional left” too?