Fire Rahm Emanuel Today!

Barack Obama should fire Rahm Emanuel today.
He has not served the President well as chief of staff.
One year ago, Obama took the oath of office riding a wave of goodwill. In the next six weeks, his popularity continued to soar. But now it’s hit bottom, and so have the Democratic prospects, after the debacle in Massachusetts.
Rahm Emanuel is responsible for a lot of this free fall.
Emanuel is a DLC Democrat, and he’s advised Obama to go in a DLC direction time and time again—and to disregard the progressive base.
On health care, Emanuel kept insisting that the public option was not very important. He helped engineer the under-the-table deal with the drug companies. He let Max Baucus dillydally, rather than push hard for a vote before last summer. And then he and Obama bent over backwards to placate Senators Ben Nelson and Joe Lieberman rather than force a vote, via the reconciliation process, on a decent progressive health care bill.
“The only non-negotiable principle is success,” Emanuel likes to say. But that’s the very definition of being unprincipled. And by being unprincipled, he’s delivered defeat.
On the economy, the all-important issue, Emanuel urged Obama to disregard the advice of Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz, two Nobel Prize-winning liberal economists, who publicly predicted that we’d have 10 percent unemployment by now if Obama didn’t propose a bigger stimulus package last spring. Emanuel and Obama’s other political advisers said the pricetag was too high.
Now Obama is paying for it.
Of course, Obama chose Emanuel for the job, and Emanuel may only be guilty of carrying out his boss’s wishes.
But Obama can’t fire himself. And he needs a chief of staff with the wisdom to help point him down a bold, progressive path. The Emanuel path is a dead end.
Matthew Rothschild is the editor of The Progressive magazine. To subscribe for just $14.97 a year, just click here.
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
This form needs Javascript to display, which your browser doesn't support. Sign up here instead
|
Resist Censorship in Tucson
- Banned in Tucson
- An Interview with Carlos Muñoz on the Tucson Book Ban
| Banned Authors Respond | |
CURRENT ISSUE: FEBRUARY 2012
Inside the Occupy Movement
Arun Gupta and Michelle Fawcett | We visited nearly thirty occupations in twenty states in two months.
What I got at Occupy Wall Street
Breanna Lembitz | I spent seven weeks in Zuccotti Park, and here is what I got.
Danny Glover
Ed Rampell | The Progressive Interview | March 2012 issue
To Wed or Not to Wed
Stephanie Fairyington | March 2012 issue
Progressive Matt
The Koch Brothers Conspire to Buy the White House
Ruth Conniff at the People's Legislature in Madison
Standing for Justice at the Capitol. Matthew Rothschild.
Come to Progressive Talks and Events
Feb. 18, 5:30 p.m.
Ruth Conniff, Progressive Principles Conference at Yale University 11-1
Read more >>
Thursday February 16 at 7:30 p.m.
VandeBurg Room, Pyle Center. Madison, WI
Not Just Gandhi: The Tradition of Nonviolence Among Muslims in South Asia
Amitabh Pal Managing Editor, The Progressive magazine.
Read more >>
Friday February 17 at 7:30 p.m. Kate Clinton at the Barrymore with Michael Feldman in Madison.
Thursday February 23 at 3:30 p.m.
Garden Key Room, Student Union, University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida
Islam Means Peace: Understanding the Muslim Principle of Nonviolence Today
Amitabh Pal Managing Editor, The Progressive magazine.
Read more >>








Comments
"...and the Nazis were right-wingers, anyone with a drop of knowledge knows that..."
.
No. Someone with knowledge would know that it has been debated for decades and there is no right or wrong answer - there will be different interpretations and opinions on it.
"Left" and "right" have different meanings to different people. Leftists look at Nazi militarism and suggest that Republican foreign policy matches. Conservatives look at Nazi domestic social policy and say that it resembles the Dems.
The theme of Beck's documentary was that the Nazis and the Communists had a lot in common; he demonstrated that they had common roots, and that both espoused "progressive" agendas. And, while we all agree Hitler and the Nazis were horrible, we hear little about the attrocities of Stalin, Mao, Che Guevara, and the Communists, who were as bad.
Do you dispute that the Communists were as bad as the Nazis? Do you dispute that they were similar? Do you dispute that they both had progressive agendas?
.