These are the sort of people who see any attempt at rational discussion and compromise as a sign of weakness to be exploited. These are liars and cheaters who make up their own rules of the game, determined to win at any cost and by whatever sleazy means necessary. They are completely unprincipled, and they are dangerous.
You called it right. Obama's "post-partisanship" is foolish, and I would add naive and irresponsible. This vain attempt at reasoned debate and compromise above all and his wonkish approach to issues are my major criticisms of him. Most dramatic case in point - allowing the healthcare debate to spin into insanity without a strong response, and letting his Democratic representatives be pilloried and shouted down by their Faux "constituents" in town hall meetings one year ago. To a similar if somewhat lesser degree, he abdicated the bully pulpit on financial reform legislation. He had huge momentum of public support on both those issues, and I'll probably be taken to task for this, he squandered it.
He impressed and inspired me with his State of the Union address in January, and his follow-up act taking the Republican caucus to the woodshed over the healthcare debate (finally . . . if too little and way too late). As I noted then, it was the first time I saw candidate Obama merged with President Obama, and I was mightily impressed. I was hopeful his newfound approach to confronting the opposition would carry forward on other issues. I saw the same spine, cool and firm if to a lesser degree, in his response to BP. Frustratingly, I have not otherwise seen this character much in evidence
What he (and his advisors?) don't seem to be getting is that in practical reality the president's role in American politics is less about the nuts and bolts of policy and more about communicating the need for those policies to the American people - in simple terms they can understand. It also requires that he stand up strongly to the opposition and poke holes in their arguments. What is so frustrating is that I know he is fully capable of this; he proved it on the campaign trail and in the instances mentioned. These are critical times in the country, dangerous times, not time to pussyfoot. It's all enough to make me wonder exactly whose side he's on.
Part of the problem, imo, is a weak Senate majority leader. If that is the case, Harry Reid needs to be replaced with someone who projects strength to the public, who will kick ass and take names on both sides of the aisle and not cave to the threat of a filibuster. I've been seeing glimmers of hope as Obama hits the campaign trail for candidates in the mid terms, noting his administration's accomplishments and pushing for small business support in particular, but again, it may be too little too late. He really needs to get it together in no uncertain terms, and fast. Otherwise, short of a miracle, the new Congress will be held in stalemate like nothing we've seen in the first two years, and we'll all be speeding for catastrophe with no brakes.
Mr. Obama, stand up and show us your balls!
The ushers will now pass the collection plate.
Last edited:
