Michael Moore to Connecticut Voters: Recall Lieberman or Face Boycott (LOL)

Michael Moore has issued an ultimatum for Connecticut voters: Recall Senator Joe Lieberman or face a boycott of the Nutmeg State. Interesting.

Moore is upset with Lieberman because he is, in part, responsible for the watered-down version of healthcare reform currently pending in the Senate. Moore blames Connecticut voters for empowering Lieberman, and he wants them to rectify the situation:

People of Connecticut: What have u done 2 this country? We hold u responsible. Start recall of Lieberman 2day or we'll boycott your state.

Two things strike me as problematic with Moore's position. FIRST, the Constitution does not provide for the "recall" of members of Congress. Accordingly, the substance of his demand is illegal. SECOND, boycotting Connecticut does not seem like an awesome economic threat. Aside from October leaf-touring season, Connecticut is not a major tourist destination. And in December, most of the trees in Connecticut are completely naked. Moore needs to go back to the drawing board!

Does "Yes We Can" Mean "No You Can't"?

Peter Beinart, the senior political writer for the Daily Beast, has joined Michael Moore, who recently ordered liberals to "Get Off Obama's Back." Beinart, who is also a professor of journalism and political Science, says that liberals need to "Lay Off Obama."

The irony of these two individuals trying to shield the president from criticism is very rich. Moore produced Fahrenheit 911 -- a 2-hour documentary that offers an extensive critique of the Bush administration and militarism. And as a journalism and political science professor, critical analysis should be as normal to Beinart as oxygen. Yet both Moore and Beinart have chastised liberals for criticizing Obama. Here's a message for both of them: Lay off Liberals.

I have written extensively on the subject of political dissent. Accordingly, I will not write much more in this post. Nonetheless, I will will take a moment to reiterate the historical fact that no social movement -- liberal or conservative -- has effectuated substantial change without engaging in dissent -- including public disagreement with political allies. The desire for change itself represents discontent with the status quo.

Because Obama campaigned largely on the promise of change, his supporters' efforts to condemn honest criticism of his policies contradict the most central message of campaign. "Yes we can" apparently means "no you can't."

Liberals should offer honest and constructive criticism of Obama when it is warranted. Anything less is disrespectful and unhelpful.

To Michael Moore: Absolutely Not!

Michael Moore's wife has convinced him that he was too harsh in his criticism of President Obama's Nobel Peace Prize. Moore has decided to share his born-again moment with other liberals by telling us to "Get off Obama's back." Well, here's my message to Moore: Absolutely not!

I remain highly skeptical of the Nobel Peace Prize committee's decision. My skepticism stems from Obama's continuation of policies that leftists -- including Moore -- criticized loudly, passionately, and relentlessly for the last 8 years. These policies include wars, troop surges, handouts to corporations, rendition, indefinite detention, denial of habeas corpus, military tribunals, state secrets, and a lack of positive action on GLBT rights. Moore's essay does not mention these things -- neither do the liberal defenses that have emerged which condemn progressives who question the prize committee's decision. If liberals truly hated these practices, then they should apply the same criticism to Obama. Otherwise, their criticism looks disingenuous and partisan.

Moore's essay also sets forth some very low standards for progressive politics. Why does Obama deserve the Nobel Peace Prize? He is "sane," "smart," wants world "peace," and was "elected." Add good looks to the list, and these traits could describe the winner of a Miss America pageant!

I believe that progressives can praise Obama when he is correct, criticize him when he is wrong, and act strategically at all times. The abolitionists did the same thing to Lincoln (whom Obama has symbolically emulated) and other moderate Republicans. The Civil Rights Movement criticized Kennedy. Today, progressives are told to be quiet and praise the establishment. History, however, means a lot more to me than sentimental political commentary.

For most of the last year, my liberal colleagues have told me (and others) to stop criticizing Obama. In a climate like this, I see no reason to heed their call. No progressive movement has accomplished its goals without criticism. Let the cheerleaders cheer and the cynics criticize. There is room for all voices -- and in this area, dissent is seriously underrepresented.

Update: Glenn Greenwald remains consistent on this issue as well, supplementing his prior commentary. See: Accusing Obama critics of "standing with the terrorists.