How to Squander the Presidency in One Year

[IndianaGreen]

A brutal and devastating column by David Michael Green summed it up best:

Published on Friday, January 22, 2010 by CommonDreams.org

How to Squander the Presidency in One Year

Hey, Conan Obama: How About Now? Can You Hear Us Now?

by David Michael Green

* He does not lead. Americans, especially in times of crisis, want their daddy-president to pick a point on the horizon and lead them to it. Often - especially in the short term - they don't even care that much which point it is. They will happily follow a president whose policies they oppose if he will but lead.

* And if he will demonstrate some conviction. I have never seen a president so utterly lacking in passion. This man literally doesn't even seem to care about himself, let alone this or that policy issue. He doesn't seem to have any strong opinions on anything, a sure prescription for presidential failure.

* He has therefore let Congress ‘lead' on nearly every issue, another surefire mistake. Instead of demanding that they pass real stimulus legislation - which would have really stimulated the economy, big-time, and right now - he let those dickheads on the Hill just load up a big pork party blivet of a bill with all the pet projects they could find, designed purely to benefit their personal standing with the voters at home, rather than to actually produce jobs for Americans. And on health care, his signature issue, he did the same thing. "You guys write it, and I'll sign the check." Could there possibly be a greater prescription for failure than allowing a bunch of the most venal people on the planet to cobble together a 2,000 page monstrosity that entirely serves their interests and those of the people whose campaign bribes put them in office?

* Well, yes, now that you mention it. If you really want to bring your government crashing to the ground, why not spend endless months negotiating with vicious thugs, who will never vote for your legislation anyhow, because they are so entirely devoted to your destruction that they're willing to call you a granny murderer? What a great and winning strategy!

* Another possible strategic move even stupider than deferring to Congress to write major legislation is to cozy up with the least popular people on the planet - including, in fact, the real-life granny killers. Got an economy that is so raw it's leaving thousands in literal peril of losing their lives? Why not draft some legislation to bail-out the people who created that mess and guarantee that they retain their multimillion dollar bonuses?!?! You know, the same folks who are always talking about how great capitalism is and how important it is to take risks! The same ones who are always telling us how awful the government is - the same government that saved them from extinction. Those folks. That's right, bail out with outrageous bonuses the very people who need it least and who caused billions of people around the planet to suffer, while leaving everyone else to fend for themselves! That'll raise your presidential job approval ratings every time! And while you're at it, bring in the much beloved health insurance and pharmaceutical corporate lobbyists, and negotiate a deal with them to craft your high profile health care legislation! What voter can't get behind that?

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/01/22-7

[DeSwiss]

1. K&R

Encapsulates the situation very well.

- Unfortunately.

[IndianaGreen]

2. According to Sen. Sherrod Brown, even now Obama won't lead on HCR

No Obama. No Plan.

Josh Marshall | January 22, 2010, 5:50PM

Brian Beutler interviewed Sen. Sherrod Brown today to get his read on the state of health care reform negotiations and whether or not there's any plan ...

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) is engaged with House progressives, trying to tease out a solution to the health care reform impasse--but he says that at the highest levels of the Senate and the White House, there's still no plan, and he doubts whether President Obama will insert himself forcefully into the process.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/01/no_obama_no_plan.php?ref=fpblg

Based on his conversations with House progressives, Brown says the mood right now is fairly dour.

"They're very unhappy," Brown admits. "Their viewpoint is it can't be just the Senate version because, first of all, it's not what they want in terms of the substance, and second it really writes them out of having any impact."

Nevertheless, he doesn't imagine the President will lay out a way forward in his State of the Union address next week, and he won't push any buttons in the Senate.

"I doubt if he does, I don't think he'll do a procedural thing. I don't think he will engage in process," Brown said of State of the Union.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/01/sherrod-brown-still-no-health-care-reform-strategy.php

[DeSwiss]

8. Yep.

I read that post late last night. Sherrod Brown, Weiner, Grayson -- they all get it.


- If Obama doesn't have a revelation, and soon, we're all screwed royally.

[senseandsensibility]

48. Very depressing

I love Sherrod Brown. Obama must listen to everyone; I don't want a Dem version of * , by any means. But it seems that he is absolutely deaf to the appeals of the very best and brightest, like Brown.

[jillan]

55. I cannot believe he is willing to let HCR go down.

Why is he so afraid to take a stand and then fight for it?

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Armstead]

4. I disagree on one point....

I don't think a lack of "passion" is the problem.. Obama has shown honest passion, anmd he is good at conveying empathy. His "cooler" personality style is not dispassionate.

However, his passion seems aimed at small micro-solutions to things rather than the big picture.

[Enthusiast]

61. I agree with Brown.

Obama has not shown passion.

[GreenArrow]

67. I haven't seen it either,

though I've seen feigned passion a couple of times.

[flyarm]

5. K&R..what more can be said...........eom

[Captain Hilts]

6. A lot of presidents do it. There is a learning curve. nt

[ProSense]

7. Dumb

"Another possible strategic move even stupider than deferring to Congress to write major legislation..."

It's Congress' friggin job.

[Enthusiast]

62. The President should lead. nt

[boppers]

9. Ah, "Tough Talk".

If only Obama was more of a bully, things would be different.

[IndianaGreen]

10. Not a bully, but a leader

Obama couldn't even cut the mustard as a squad leader, much less a company commander.

His lack of executive experience really shows!

Let's compare Obama to JFK on the 1963 October Missile Crisis. The reason we are alive today is because JFK resisted the pressure from his military to act recklessly in Cuba. Had Obama been President then, he would have gone alone with his generals just as he did on Afghanistan, and the world would have ended in nuclear incineration.

[boppers]

12. Oh lets do compare Obama and JFK.

One word: Vietnam.

[IndianaGreen]

13. JFK decided to disengage from Vietnam in late 1963, and Obama...

How many wars has he gotten us into so far?

[boppers]

15. JFK decided on a troop reduction of... 1K, out of 16K After supporting a coup.

How many wars has Obama gotten us in to? None, by my count. Iraq and Afghanistan weren't started under his presidency.

[IndianaGreen]

19. He is into his chin in the Horn of Africa

and he has deepened our military role in the Philippines, plus he is expanding US military presence and bases in our Hemisphere.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

33. How about JFK's FIRST year?

[IndianaGreen]

36. He fired Allen Dulles from CIA after Bay of Pigs

a CIA project begun under the Eisenhower Administration. JFK learned from his mistakes, and never trusted the CIA again.

Unlike Obama, JFK was a war hero and he led his PT crew under the most dire circumstances.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

47. What does being a war hero have to do with anything?

McCain was a war hero too. We knew that Obama was never in the service when we voted for him.

The Bay of Pigs was not the only "failure" of JFK's during his first year. Kruschev, the Berlin Wall and civil rights also come to mind.

[Enthusiast]

63. But why is McCain a hero?

Because he was shot down and endured terrible captivity? This is not heroic, he had no choice other than to die in captivity. What passes as heroic in this country....

[golfguru]

50. Most of you are too young to really know how good JFK was...

I have seen most of his TV coverage first hand, especially the
Q & A sessions with press. JFK had more charisma than all
the other presidents since then combined. He was the wittiest!
He could answer every question in detail without having to say "I will look into that".
JFK was loved by majority of Americans.

[treestar]

14. You mean it starts out as a dictatorship and it's weak to put it back to what

it's supposed to be.

People who need a daddy-President can shove it. Immature even for babies.

They should've voted for McCain who would have been glad to oblige.

Whiners.

[Enthusiast]

64. Teestar again with the RW point of view. nt

[Vidar]

17. K&R.

[whistler162]

18. Man the stupid is strong in Mr. Green!!

[scheming daemons]

20. Agreed,,, so much FAIL for one column

..

[Armstead]

27. UM it's Ms. Green....and you should be so stupid

[inna]

29. No, it's not "Ms. Green":

David Michael Green is a professor of political science at Hofstra University in New York. He is delighted to receive readers' reactions to his articles (mailto:[e-mail]), but regrets that time constraints do not always allow him to respond. More of his work can be found at his website, www.regressiveantidote.net.

[Armstead]

32. Depends on which the poster was referring to....The OPor the author of the article

Eithr way, the content wasn't stupid

[inna]

41. Of course, the content wasn't "stupid" - in fact, it was the best article I read today, for sure. nt

[Aramchek]

21. you should stick with "How to be a loud, albeit ineffective, Socialist tool"

[inna]

22. Personal attacks are not allowed here. Discuss the issues instead of attacking posters.

:thumbsdown:

[Aramchek]

24. what about personal attacks against Obama? are they encouraged?

[pecwae]

35. Permitted unless he's a DUer.

[emilyg]

23. The minute you get person - you've

lost the argument.

[Aramchek]

25. then you lost the argument against Obama long, long ago

[emilyg]

30. I don't care to argue for

or against Obama. It's up to him to argue for himself.

[Forkboy]

54. And you should stick with "How to be a troll with the I.Q. of mayonnaise."

:hi:

[QC]

68. You are far too kind. n/t

[Beacool]

26. Right on target!!!

"He has therefore let Congress ‘lead' on nearly every issue, another surefire mistake. Instead of demanding that they pass real stimulus legislation - which would have really stimulated the economy, big-time, and right now - he let those dickheads on the Hill just load up a big pork party blivet of a bill with all the pet projects they could find, designed purely to benefit their personal standing with the voters at home, rather than to actually produce jobs for Americans. And on health care, his signature issue, he did the same thing. "You guys write it, and I'll sign the check." Could there possibly be a greater prescription for failure than allowing a bunch of the most venal people on the planet to cobble together a 2,000 page monstrosity that entirely serves their interests and those of the people whose campaign bribes put them in office?"

He allowed Pelosi, Reid and Congress to steamroll over him.

;(

[amborin]

37. exactly! here, another reminder how he tossed HCR, for example, to Congress:

snip

" Unlike Clinton, President Obama did not design this reform in an academic think tank, but tossed it into the political cauldron of congress, with results that could have been anticipated.

Every title, clause and section is designed to appease wealthy interests, what I call the Medical Industrial Complex. The other criteria beyond raw financial clout is public perception, that every aspect must poll well, not necessarily work well.

The disconnect, the absurdities, inconsistencies and hidden traps, will be lost in the thicket of thousands of pages of this law."

snip

http://healthcarebeyondpartisanship.blogspot.com/2009/12/liberals-reasons-why-hcr-must-be.html

[Beacool]

51. Thank you for the link.

"Sadly, Democrats have avoided a substantive debate on this issue by deflecting all arguments against this bill as partisan political attacks. Obama's soaring rhetoric, that this is an "historic moment coming once in a generation" ignores the ugly defects of this legislation. This approach seems to be effective, due to the particularly low public opinion the other party, and their desperate exaggerations that are easily refuted. So what real dialogue that does occur is with the major beneficiaries of this bill, private health insurers and pharmacy companies for instance, who will both benefit greatly and want to keep it that way."

It's a poorly written bill because it was compromised to the nth degree. What good could come out of it?

:-(

[woolldog]

40. Agree 100%

I should've voted for Clinton. She's a fighter. Obama doesn't have the stomach or the balls for a fight with the rethugs.

[Beacool]

53. I always think in times like this about Carville's comment:

"If Hillary gave him one of her cojones, they'd both have a pair."

;)

[Lilyeye]

58. Coulda, Woulda, Shoulda

[ShortnFiery]

52. Yes, sadly I agree. eom

[Lord Helmet]

66. so let me get this straight

according to you:

hit pieces on Obama from commondreams are good

-- and --

hit pieces on HClinton from commondreams are bad

beacool: The bullshit emanating from the left is worse than the crap in the RW blogs because at least the left should know better than to propagate this kind of B.S.

LINK

:crazy:

[inna]

28. Brutal is right, but definitely a must read.

KR

[gulfcoastliberal]

31. Truth hurts. K&R nt

[amborin]

34. brutal but sums it up. K&R

[TexasObserver]

38. Harsh, but more accurate than not.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

39. Amazing how much political capital he had when he came into office....

Then he just squandered it away.


He used Rahm to attack Dean instead of Lieberman. Absolutely unbelievable.

[inna]

42. +1. Could not agree with you more.

[Enthusiast]

65. Me too. nt

[jillan]

56. +1

[Robeson]

43. He certainly didn't pull any punches....

...I'll bet his classes are entertaining.

[Dinger]

44. Whee! K & R : )

[democracy1st]

45. K & R

[burning rain]

46. K & R for useful criticism.

.

[swilton]

49. That's About How I See It

Thanks for posting!

[depakid]

57. I really hate to have to agree with Green's assessment(s)

but in his acerbic way- he's correct- and echos similar takes of other, more objective observers and analysts like Drew Westen and George Lakoff- to name but a few.

Hopefully, the administration have learned from its mistakes- though with the "bipartisan" budget commission looking to result in another such fiasco, one definitely has to wonder.

[Little Star]

59. Ouch! The truth ain't pretty.

[GinaMaria]

60. I hope the dems wake up and lead

this has been a depressing tragedy to watch. There's three more acts to follow, so he could really turn things around.

[invictus]

69. +1