There's a column in the National Journal today by James Oliphant which equates the Obama White House to a never-ending campaign. The point is that president Obama and his team focus on short term political gains rather than on strategies which would help improve the country. Obama campaigns instead of governing.
The analysis by Oliphant is hardly a new one, but what is more interesting is that this viewpoint is now spreading across much of the media. Even the liberals in the mainstream media are now recognizing just how poorly Obama is doing at governing. When there is a crisis, Obama does not deal with it; he goes to a fund raiser. When there is a problem, Obama takes no action; instead, he gives a speech about it and moves to the next item. That sort of attention span may work in a campaign, but it fails miserably when one is supposed to be governing the country.
To me, the most amazing thing about all of this discussion is that the media has remained silent about it for so long. Anyone who watched Obama during his first term should have noticed his inability to govern. Think about it. When Obama took office, he had lopsided majorities in both houses of Congress. He could get whatever he wanted. Obama started by seeking a massive stimulus package (which he, of course, got). Instead of proposing a bill to be offered in Congress, however, Obama let the congressional Democrats design the stimulus and determine its contents. America spent almost a trillion dollars and much of it was wasted on pet projects of certain congressional Democrats rather than being spent on thing that would benefit the country. The same thing happened with Obamacare. President Obama had clear objectives in that fight, but he never put forward his own plan for approval by Congress. Once again, Obama proved unable to control the shape of the law that resulted.
By the time the Democrats lost the elections in 2010, Obama still had not focused on governing. Remember, in those days, Obama's big talking point was that the wealthy did not pay enough in taxes. Obama could have easily gotten approval by Congress to raise taxes on the wealthy, but he chose to keep the issue as a political campaign rather than passing an actual law that would carry out the policy. Indeed, when 2010 ended, Obama agreed to a two year extension of the tax rates with no increases on anyone. The reality was completely different than the rhetoric. In other words, everything was political.
Things have gotten worse since then. Obama has chosen to make his campaign about how Republicans refuse to negotiate or agree on anything. It sounds good in a speech, but it is not true. Reality is that Obama never even tries to reach agreement. There is no Obama plan on global warming. There is no Obama plan for economic growth. There is no Obama plan for tax simplification. There is not even an Obama plan for increasing infrastructure construction. There are speeches and then there are more speeches. The hard work of governing is never even attempted by the White House.
When it comes to foreign policy, Obama is no different. The problem, however, is that in foreign policy the adversary is not the Republicans, rather the adversaries are the enemies of the USA. Failure to act on domestic matters does not result in terror attacks on American citizens. Obama's failures to act on foreign policy, however, bring death and destruction to people and places that would have been safe under a more competent president.
The analysis by Oliphant is hardly a new one, but what is more interesting is that this viewpoint is now spreading across much of the media. Even the liberals in the mainstream media are now recognizing just how poorly Obama is doing at governing. When there is a crisis, Obama does not deal with it; he goes to a fund raiser. When there is a problem, Obama takes no action; instead, he gives a speech about it and moves to the next item. That sort of attention span may work in a campaign, but it fails miserably when one is supposed to be governing the country.
To me, the most amazing thing about all of this discussion is that the media has remained silent about it for so long. Anyone who watched Obama during his first term should have noticed his inability to govern. Think about it. When Obama took office, he had lopsided majorities in both houses of Congress. He could get whatever he wanted. Obama started by seeking a massive stimulus package (which he, of course, got). Instead of proposing a bill to be offered in Congress, however, Obama let the congressional Democrats design the stimulus and determine its contents. America spent almost a trillion dollars and much of it was wasted on pet projects of certain congressional Democrats rather than being spent on thing that would benefit the country. The same thing happened with Obamacare. President Obama had clear objectives in that fight, but he never put forward his own plan for approval by Congress. Once again, Obama proved unable to control the shape of the law that resulted.
By the time the Democrats lost the elections in 2010, Obama still had not focused on governing. Remember, in those days, Obama's big talking point was that the wealthy did not pay enough in taxes. Obama could have easily gotten approval by Congress to raise taxes on the wealthy, but he chose to keep the issue as a political campaign rather than passing an actual law that would carry out the policy. Indeed, when 2010 ended, Obama agreed to a two year extension of the tax rates with no increases on anyone. The reality was completely different than the rhetoric. In other words, everything was political.
Things have gotten worse since then. Obama has chosen to make his campaign about how Republicans refuse to negotiate or agree on anything. It sounds good in a speech, but it is not true. Reality is that Obama never even tries to reach agreement. There is no Obama plan on global warming. There is no Obama plan for economic growth. There is no Obama plan for tax simplification. There is not even an Obama plan for increasing infrastructure construction. There are speeches and then there are more speeches. The hard work of governing is never even attempted by the White House.
When it comes to foreign policy, Obama is no different. The problem, however, is that in foreign policy the adversary is not the Republicans, rather the adversaries are the enemies of the USA. Failure to act on domestic matters does not result in terror attacks on American citizens. Obama's failures to act on foreign policy, however, bring death and destruction to people and places that would have been safe under a more competent president.
No comments:
Post a Comment