So kos linked to this post on Balloon Juice in the Mid-day post, calling the article "pretty compelling". I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with him on that.
First of all I'd say that there's nothing special about that post compared to the usual "Stop criticizing Obama! Support him more!" arguments that have been going on since his campaign started. Those posts came in response to criticism of his support of the FISA bill in 2008, they come back every time anyone says anything critical.
The post also unfortunately engages in the lame belittling of the other side that does no one any good.
The constant use of the term "poutrage" in the post completely undermines any respect I might have for the author. The purpose of terms like that one (or the other classics which served the same purpose like "purity troll") is to avoid substantial debate and instead belittle people who hold opposing viewpoints, in this case comparing them to toddlers sulking because they can't have a cookie.
That kind of thing has it's place, but when you do it instead of actually debating the point at hand, it makes you look like a fool instead of your opponents.
The author of the post dances around what might be called substantial arguments but doesn't really, fully make a case for any of them. Despite this, I will address them briefly.
"..the most progressive President in my lifetime.." I will just go ahead and agree with this point, and I will also say I am glad for it. However, I also think the bar is unreasonably low. Politics in our country have been so completely taken over by the interests of the wealthy and corporations that most of the time progressive viewpoints and ideas are not considered seriously. (See how single payer was tossed out before the opening bell with HCR.)
So while Obama is undoubtedly the most progressive President for generations, he is also not really all that progressive. He has shown a distinct tendency to stick with the establishment, which means sticking with wealthy and powerful corporate interests on more issues than not. When he does make any steps against the corporation-favoring status quo they are tiny, tiny baby steps. In my view this is not good enough.
"...have his back..." The author implies that those of us who are critical of Obama don't "have his back." This is really common, and completely baffles me. First of all, how do we not have his back? We are arguing for progressive positions and solutions to problems. We are arguing that he should do things MORE progressive than what he is actually doing or trying to do, if anything we are providing a much needed contrast to his views to show where they actually land in the spectrum of political ideology. What is really meant by this? Most of us who are critical of Obama have normal day jobs and are not in positions where we can really take any action that makes any difference either way.
Does the author mean that we should support Obama financially? If so, blow me. Like many, many other people I gave money during the election. In my view Obama has repaid this by favoring the requests of corporate lobbyists over those of us who supported him in 2008. I am not a serf, if my support is not returned in kind, then there is absolutely no reason I should offer it again, and simply insisting that I should is a dick move (thus my "blow me" response.) I have and will continue to support the campaigns of those that I feel are working to actually help the average person, and not giving undue weight to the desires of corporate lobbyists.
Does he mean we should vote for him? I don't think there's many of us who are critical of Obama who are seriously considering voting Republican. Speaking for myself, I still vote Democratic, and would never vote for the GOP. I think most other liberal bloggers who are critical of Obama fall into the same camp.
There is a substantial debate to be had about whether Obama is "sufficiently" progressive. He has done some good things, and I have never seen another progressive make a serious argument that they wish they had voted for McCain. But after 8 years of Bush, I wanted better. I think we as a country (and Afghanistan and Iraq as countries) deserve better, and I think Wall Street, BP, Monstanto, Haliburton, et al deserve much worse.
But hey, that's me being concerned with what's actually going on rather than simply calling people who disagree pouting babies.