Barack Obama's theory of power (Robert Kuttner)

[Enrique]

originally titled, "Zen Master Obama", changed a minute ago, possibly because it might offend people of that faith.

http://prospect.org/cs/articles?article=barack_obamas_theory_of_power

Power is not only what you have, but what your enemy thinks you have. --Saul Alinsky


Barack Obama is one of the shrewdest and most compelling political figures in modern times. He had to be, to become our first African American president, ascending from obscurity to the White House in just four years. Though his campaign had its ideological ambiguities, Obama basically ran and won as a progressive. But despite a financial collapse created on the Republicans' watch and a current Republican agenda far outside mainstream public opinion, the political center has continued to shift to the right during Obama's presidency. How do we reconcile this gaping contradiction?

To his defenders, Obama has done remarkably well given the circumstances. Notwithstanding Republican obstructionism and his lack of a reliable working majority in Congress, he was able to win landmark legislation. If Obama could have gotten more on the stimulus bill or the health bill, say his admirers, he would have. As for the economy and the budget, Obama is unjustly reaping blame for deep trends set in motion under George W. Bush.

Obama's critics contend that his prolonged fantasy of bipartisanship, his failure to lay the blame for the depressed economy squarely on the Republicans, and his reluctance to use his bully pulpit to tell a coherent story, particularly about jobs, needlessly weakened the Democrats and led to avoidable losses in the 2010 midterm. More fundamentally, under Obama government has lost credibility as a necessary force for economic recovery and fairness, undermining the Democrats' core appeal to voters. At the very least, Obama failed to drive the agenda or exploit the full possibilities of presidential leadership in a crisis.

In the formulation of the political historian James MacGregor Burns, Obama ran and inspired voters as a "transformational" figure but governed as a "transactional" one. Notwithstanding a vow to profoundly change Washington, Obama took the Washington power constellation as a given. Despite an economic emergency, he moved neither Congress nor public opinion very much and only seldom used his oratorical gifts. "He is so damned smart and confident that he thinks he just has to explain things to the American people once," says former House Appropriations Chair David Obey. "He doesn't appreciate that you have to reinforce a message 50 times."

(...)

[patrice]

1. K&R

[KoKo]

12. kick

[OKNancy]

2. good, well balanced criticism of Obama. Not over the top

name-calling and hyperbolic bs that is so often written. See the comment sections of the article for examples of that.

[patrice]

5. 1+++++++++++++++++! because that extreme crap, L or R, makes you wonder

if the poster actually UNDERSTANDS anything or just happened to stumble across something that triggered their craziness.

And, when ALL is said and done, doesn't problem resolution, i.e. what we call Progress, REQUIRE, essence -tially NEED, understanding. If problem solving isn't the most important priority, perhaps people should just say something like "I don't give a shit" up front.

[Armstead]

10. If Republican and CONservative policies are the problem....Then solving them does not mean....

perpetuating them by surrender.

And yes, Obama has been surrendering and the Democratic Political establishment has been surrendering for 30 years.

Either that or they like those CONservative corporate policies, and just don't want to say so out loud.

I'm sorry if that may seem strident. But the record and results and present circumstances bear that out.

[ProSense]

3. These

strained and lengthy hyperanalyses are hilarious.

<...>

This stance, the opposite of Harry Truman's, has infuriated Obama's allies in the House. During the last session, important progressive legislation on jobs and energy independence passed the House but was never even brought to a vote in the Senate. In one emblematic episode in December 2009, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi pulled out all the stops to get the House to narrowly pass a $154 billion public-investment, jobs, and unemployment-extension bill. The White House, however, rebuffed Pelosi's entreaties to urge Majority Leader Harry Reid to bring the measure to a vote in the Senate. At the time, Obama's aides were convinced that job growth was around the corner, had already moved on to deficit reduction as the theme of the 2010 State of the Union address, and were laying plans for "Recovery Summer," a conceit that entirely backfired.

<...>

The parallels with Bill Clinton are instructive, but so are the differences. Clinton faced resurgent Republicans, especially in the House, almost as ferociously nihilistic as today's Tea Party. In 1994, Democrats lost eight seats in the Senate and 54 in the House, giving Republicans control. As Clinton ruefully wrote in his memoir, "Ironically, I had hurt the Democrats by both my victories and my defeats. The loss of health care and the passage of NAFTA demoralized many of our base voters and depressed turnout."

Clinton then brought in Dick Morris, who sent for center-right pollster/strategists Mark Penn and Doug Schoen. Together they devised a strategy of triangulation -- the president above both parties, eerily prefiguring Obama. But though Clinton gave ground on fiscal issues, promising to achieve budget balance within a decade, he also began fighting back on traditional Democratic terms. On one flank, he was defining a new centrism, while on the other, he was vigorously smacking down Republicans for threatening popular core Democratic programs.

<...>

Clinton refused to accept Republican cuts. Twice, Gingrich carried out his threat to shut down the government, blocking appropriation bills. After a second shutdown, it was Gingrich who flinched first, and Clinton whose stock rose in the polls. On Nov. 27, Gingrich abandoned plans to run for the presidency. Less than three years later, he was forced out as House Speaker.

<...>

Obama "rebuffed" Pelosi. Obama should pull a Clinton!!! Is Dick Morris available?

[OKNancy]

4. but compared to what is said in other articles

( like the one that's at the top of the greatest page - ugh) this seems reasonable.

[KoKo]

8. Agree about Cornell West...sort of self-aggrandizing...but many DU'ers

have felt left out and attacked and that gave us a chance to vent. I think the Kuttner article is what most "reasoned and caring DU Democrats of all stripes" could find interesting to think about. He's very fair in his observations and not attacking or personalizing as West did in his article.

Still..not to trash any of us who Recommended Chris Hedges interview with West...because, as I said, may of us DU Democrats find ourselves not able to express any kind of concern about Obama's Presidency so far because of being attacked with snark about "ponies and rainbows" or juvenile "hit and run" posts.

So, Kuttner's article is good because it helpful in framing why some of us are concerned even though we still like the Obamas and their Kids and we are hoping so much for him to be a great DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT. But, time is wasting, and we are hoping he gets that he has a fractured base and Indies who were disillusioned with the Repugs and took a chance and came over to Dems hoping that Obama would do something...who are now very upset...and either will stay home or if Repugs put up anyone except a "crazy" will vote against Obama in 2012 because they are still looking for "Hope and Change."

I truly hope that someone close to Obama gives him a copy of Kuttner's critique. I think if he's as good in his heart as we thought and hope he is that he will learn from this. Kuttner says there's no one close to him to act like Ted Kennedy did to Clinton. Let's hope someone comes forward that he trusts who will slip it to him.

Peace!

[Armstead]

9. Hit nail on head.....

[Enrique]

6. yes, Obama rebuffed Pelosi

that's not an analysis. That is an event, that happened, in reality. I remember it. I remember Reid said Obama called him at home at night and told him to cut a deal with Lieberman and whoever the Republican negotiator was. Reid chose to go with Obama over Pelosi, and cut the deal.

[KoKo]

7. This is an Excellent Read! Most Dems here would probably find

this a fair article with some interesting insights into Obama's Presidency and character.

It's long but worth it.

:kick:

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

11. Good article. nt

[KoKo]

13. It is very good read...surprised to see that so few here in GDP failed to read it.

This was so well written and so favorable to Obama in so many way, I would have thought it would have had many more reads and replies.

:shrug: What's with that?

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

14. I'm not surprised at all. nt

[vaberella]

15. "exploit full possibilities"---No, he told Congress to do their job. He's not Bush.

What people seem to want is a man who did what Bush did. Lie to Congress and force their will on Congress and make Congress bend and do as they will in a fog of fear---fear of what may come from outsiders, fear of losing political power, and just stupid senseless fear. Obama comes into power and then says Congress---there is no fear, do you're job. You create the laws and I enforce them. However, what people seem to want---or what I seem to get from the blogging Left, for the most part is Bush---or Cheney---but one of the Left. Basically riding rough shod and forgetting the division of power that our forefathers had delegated. Obama has risked a lot of political capital for things he sincerely believed in but most people wanted him to lose it all on one thing even if he got nothing. He doesn't work like that. He believes if there's a step in the right direction at least 85% right he's going to follow through.


The article at times is very well written and other times the writer forgets the role of Congress--and forgets that we do have a division of power that doesn't make Obama a "magic negro" as so many would love him to be---especially when I read this article. As though Obama could have done it all and all on his own. ~sigh~ It doesn't work like that.

[KoKo]

16. It's pretty well balanced...

I didn't get what you say about "magic negro." That seemed really off the wall to me. What does "magic negro" mean. There was nothing mentioned about something like that in the article.

:shrug:

[Safetykitten]

17. Oh joy. Another theory.

[KoKo]

18. Did you read the article? What did you think about what he said?

Your reply was odd since it's such a well-balanced article. I would like to know what you thought about it. Was there anything you agreed with...and if you had some disagreement what really bugged you about what he said.