Obama et la frustration des autres

Obama et la frustration des autres

Avec le site le plus puissant de la “gauche” institutionnelle qui s’affirme réformiste, Arianna Huffington représente une force importante de l’establishment, et le soutien naturel originel d’Obama. Son évolution depuis plus d’un an a été de plus en plus critique. Ici, lors de l’émission Fareed Zakaria GPS, de CNN, elle lance une attaque violente contre le président, proclamant que la frustration est générale, au-delà des différences entre le vieux clivage entre la gauche et la droite. Personne ne la contredit parmi les autres intervenants, y compris Zakaria lui-même, autre personnage clé de l’establishment, tendance modérée. On doit voir dans cet épisode la confirmation effectivement de l'existence d'un mouvement puissant, transcendant les partis, de mécontentement profond affectant désormais l’establishment washingtonien.

Extraits transcrits de passages de l’émission sur Huffington Post, le 27 juin 2010

«Arianna appeared as a guest on CNN's “Fareed Zakaria GPS” on Sunday, along with Eliot Spitzer, Ross Douthat And Katrina Vanden Heuval. The roundtable discussed the growing frustration with Obama over his handling of the economy and the Gulf oil spill.

»“President Obama is front and center in the news again this week,” Zakaria began. “This time it's for the firing of Stanley McChrystal. Before that he was being criticized for his handling of the oil spill. His approval levels are down, and the nattering nabobs of negativism have been hammering him around the clock. Even some of the most left leaning of the commentary have turned on Barack Obama. So what does all this mean?”

»Spitzer said that Obama needs to do more to take charge of the oil spill response. “He trusts people too much,” Spitzer said. “He trusted Wall Street. He trusted the Republicans to engage in a meaningful way. He trusted BP. He's 0 for three.”

»“What Eliot said is absolutely critical,” Arianna continued. “It's not just trust. I think there is almost like a reverence that the president has for authority. You know, a reverence for establishments. You know, the Wall Street establishment. The military establishment. The BP establishment, you know? Even his own admiral in charge of the BP oil spill a few weeks ago said that ‘I trust that what Tony Hayward is telling me.’ He actually used those words. So that is really very fundamental problem that is affecting his whole presidency.”

»“Liberals are dismayed. They're angry. They're abandoning him,” Zakaria said. Arianna replied that “This whole framing as a right versus left debate – a liberal verse conservative debate is completely flawed. It's obsolete. It's making it much harder for us to solve our problems as a country.”

»“Wall Street reform is a classic example,” she continued, “where some of the best conservative minds, and some of the best liberal minds agree that if you don't have the end of too big to fail, if you don't have fundamental derivatives reform, everything else is ultimately cosmetic.”»

On retrouve la même frustration généralisée dans d'autres déclarations d'Arianna Huffington, à la même émission, également dans une transcription du 27 juin 2010. Elle y parle en termes extrêmement indulgents et compréhensifs de la popularité de Sarah Palin et du mouvement Tea Party, estimant que ces divers événements sont complètement justifiés par la situation et par le gouvernement d'Obama. Là aussi, déclarations remarquables pour une personnalité de la gauche modérée, d'habitude très sévère pour cet activisme de droite.

«“Well, Sarah Palin is responding to something beyond the base,” Arianna responded. “She is responding to the anger at the bailout. And she's responding to a sense of unfairness among the American people which goes to independents and which goes to a lot of middle class Americans who are feeling that the game is rigged, that the fix is in, and that therefore, they're in real trouble. And she's appealing to that.

»“If you really interview a lot of the people in the Tea Party movement, no matter what their first explanation is, their second explanation for their anger is the bailout. And I think Republicans and Democrats have to come to terms with that. Especially now that we're seeing this anemic Wall Street reform going through, which we all know is not going to prevent the next meltdown.”»

dedefensa.org