home

A Need For Resolve

Booman writes:

The problem is that bankers and CEOs and media executives and congresspeople are not going to change unless they are forced to change. And that is where the people can try to help Obama, or where they can blame him for the situation being ungovernable. That's not to take Obama completely off the hook. He needs to bust some heads. He needs to take on his enemies rather than pleading with them to be reasonable. They're not going to be reasonable. But, the truth remains, to get something done in Congress when the Republicans are pursuing a strategy of obstruction, you need a miracle.

This is a strange argument to me. "Forcing change from the ground up" is a difficult endeavor in any circumstance. It is truly impossible when leaders are, at best, bystanders, at worst, impediments. I would say most people Booman aims his criticism at are more than willing to help Obama fight for change, if Obama is willing to actually, you know, fight for change. The problem has always been the Post Partisan Unity Schtick. As Kevin Drum writes:

I'm a fan of Obama's, but this has always been his big blind spot. He came to office convinced — sincerely, it seems — that he could change the tone of Washington DC. That was always a fantasy. The way to get things done is to make a case for them, build public support for them, blast your enemies for opposing them, and just generally fight like hell for them. It can be done with a smile, but it has to be done. Obama seems to have a hard time getting that.

I stupidly thought Obama would drop the Schtick, given the opportunity and challenges faced in his first year in office. He didn't. It is not clear he will.

Unless he does, change will not happen. Miracles or not.

Speaking for me only

< Jury Convicts Roeder in Abortion Doctor Killing | Obama At His Best >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    He lives in a dream world (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by mmc9431 on Fri Jan 29, 2010 at 02:07:27 PM EST
    If the HRC debacle didn't wake Obama up, I don't know what will. His entire first year agenda has been obstructed by the Republicans. (Even his moderate champion Snowe dumped on him) Now I read on another post where he's traveling to meet with the GOP.

    I don't know where he saw this fantasy world in the first place. Reagan sure didn't worry about what the Democrats thought. And Bush didn't either. Both pushed through the agenda that their base elected them to do.

    I would think a group of senior Senators would be making a trip to the WH and confronting him on what his post partisan schtick is doing the the party across the country. Is there anyone in the Senate he would listen to?

    Reports are that Obama, in his (5.00 / 3) (#3)
    by Anne on Fri Jan 29, 2010 at 02:17:36 PM EST
    Q and A with Republicans at the GOP retreat today, was masterful in exposing their obstructionism.

    We can hope that someone has read him the riot act, and that this represents a new direction, but...the part of me that has, over at least the last four years, watched Democrats act tough for a little bit and then revert to being pushovers, is finding it hard not to be somewhat cynical about that possibility.

    It would be nice to see Obama take a real leadership role that would encourage Congressional Democrats to stop submitting to the will of Republicans for the sake of comity and collegiality.  Nice, that is, as long as it would be for the sake of true Democratic ideals, and not some neoliberal, Reagan-redux agenda.

    God, I am so demanding...

    Parent

    Worse still (none / 0) (#5)
    by cal1942 on Fri Jan 29, 2010 at 09:54:18 PM EST
    Democrats act tough for a little bit and then revert to being pushovers

    Then apologizing.

    Parent

    pres. obama suffers (3.50 / 2) (#4)
    by cpinva on Fri Jan 29, 2010 at 04:19:28 PM EST
    from massive, sycophant induced ego; he actually started to believe the press releases. dangerous in actors and politicians (not that there's much difference between the two), and almost a sure guarantee of failure.

    perhaps it's time the first lady had a talk with him, and brought him back to earth.

    I don't know (none / 0) (#6)
    by cal1942 on Fri Jan 29, 2010 at 10:00:59 PM EST
    if we even have veteran Senators that haven't been conditioned in the last few decades to fade when confronting Republicans.

    Do we even have a group of say 5 wise men from the Senate Democratic Caucus who could play the part of sage wise men that could pull off that role, putting a fire under Obama?

    Parent

    It's too much a top-down presidency (2.00 / 0) (#1)
    by Anne on Fri Jan 29, 2010 at 02:05:57 PM EST
    for Kevin's prescription to work.

    When Obama took an "I've got it from here - thanks!" approach with the thousands - millions? - of grassroots volunteers and staff, I think the message was just that: "thanks for your help, but it's my show now."  

    I don't see any particular interest on his part to gather the power of the people behind him - as Kevin suggests - to help him get what he wants from Congress; is this because he doesn't think he needs their help, or because he just doesn't want to feel like he's being told what to do?  Or both?

    Is it a function of ego that he believes he can do it all himself?  That the power of his personality will triumph over ideology and politics, and he can simply present the victories as his and his alone?  Who knows?

    Whatever the reason, he makes a huge mistake in not understanding the perils and pitfalls of having an electorate that in increasingly angry.  Recent polling suggests that people still like Obama, but I think the grace period for him is coming to a close.