From the moment Barack Hussein Obama strode to the podium in Boston that July evening in 2004, he struck a chord with America. One of the hallmarks of the magical ascension of a little known State Senator from Illinois to the highest office in the land has been the ability of Mr. Obama to communicate his vision with clarity, passion and conviction. Over the past several months, at critical junctures, Barack Obama has had to stand and deliver – in Philadelphia his speech on race was one of the defining moments of his campaign. In Denver on the 45th Anniversary of “I have a Dream”; Barack Obama rallied the troops, and set the tone that his would not be the same doomed effete Democratic campaign of years past.
Yet the magic of campaign oratory which is often preaching to the choir, have been challenged by the realities of governance which often means saying different things to different audiences all at the same time. As President, Barack Obama has delivered significant speeches - in Egypt he laid out his vision of a new order in the Middle East, and during the late summer with Health Care lying in the balance, he spoke in strident terms on the importance passing that legislation. Yet many question the effectiveness of those efforts. For all their import, and hype, they were not considered game changers. After the Cairo speech, Columnist George Will sniffed that President Obama was “adored, but ignored”. Recently in a New York Times piece titled “The President Whose Words Once Soared” President Obama’s inability to impact the local elections in Virginia and New Jersey were cited as examples of his diminishing capacity to affect change with his oratory.
To be fair, Barack Obama inherited an unprecedented mess, a country whose global reputation was tarnished; we were vilified for allowing our viral investment instruments to infect the global economy, our mismanagement of two wars, and our failure to lead on issues like global warming, and green economy. But now, President Obama no longer has the luxury of blaming this quagmire on his predecessor. In the summer of 2008 many in the Democratic Party quietly were having “buyer’s remorse” as the body blows of the McCain Campaign begin to chip away at the Obama aura. Now more than a year later, the attacks that came from the McCain camp, pale in comparison from what seems to be a smoldering discontent within the ranks of the Democratic Party. For months left leaning pundits like Arianna Huffington, have wrung their hands on the pace of change, questioning the Obama Administration approach to health care, Don’t ask Don’t tell, the closing of Gitmo, and the “sacking” of Green expert of Van Jones. More recently both the NAACP and the Congressional Black Caucus have grumbled about Obama Administration efforts on behalf of the African American Community.
Is the honeymoon over? Has the “Yes we Can” magic of 2008 worn off already? Perhaps or perhaps not. Barack Obama in my opinion has oft been underestimated as a shrewd and calculating political operator; even now with the help of his friend former Virginia Governor Tim Keane, he is reshaping the Democratic National Committee in his own image. With a nod toward 2010, the Obama team has already informed many conservative Democrats that they will be rewarded for their support for health care with the vast resources of his political arm “Organizing for America”. Yet dark clouds now appear over the once confidence visage of team Obama. Perception is reality, and while below the radar the Obama Administration has pushed through several progressive agenda items, the old political bugaboos of jobs and war lurk like a precancerous cell on the verge of metastasizing.
During the campaign Vice Presidential candidate Joe Biden said in the debates that “Past is Prologue”. How right he was. The question which presidential past will reduplicate itself over the next few years? The Obama victory harkened comparisons to past Presidents Abe Lincoln, John F. Kennedy and Franklin Roosevelt - but now the name Lyndon Johnson is beginning to creep its way into the conversation. Not so good. President Lyndon Johnson’s management of the Vietnam War which forced cuts in domestic programs, created space for a progressive insurgency within the Democratic Party that ultimately forced President abrogate his Presidency by not running for a second term. That intra party fracture, coupled with a third party candidate George Wallace, handed the White House over to a Republican Party that had been humiliated only four years earlier.
It is clear that Barack Obama would least like to be compared to the doomed Johnson Administration of 1968. Yet, this is the historical context that President Barack Obama faces as he makes his case for sending more troops to Afghanistan tomorrow night. Tomorrow with a nation weary of war, and his own base questioning him on several fronts, President Barack Hussein Obama will need harness all of his oratory skills to sale this war to this nation. Simply put, he needs to get it right.
Time after time, when Barack Obama strode to the microphone, the stakes were high, he had to hit a home run, ground rule doubles, or warning track fly balls would not do. Time after time he succeeded. Tomorrow night is one of those nights – President Obama must hit the long ball. While it is clear that he is committed to a troop increase, the President needs to include an exit strategy that is cogent, workable, and believable. President Obama must tell the American public that at the end of the day, he plans to end this war, even if it is over the objections of his military and war hawks in Congress. With the echoes of Lyndon Johnson ringing in his ears, President Barack Obama, the winner of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize winner has to end this war in no uncertain terms or face the reality this war may end his Presidency.
Monday, November 30, 2009
Monday, November 23, 2009
Mr, Friedman - You almost got it right
Below is my response to the NY Times Piece by my favorite columnist Tom Friedman
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/22/opinion/22friedman.html?em
Thomas Friedman’s piece titled Advice from Grandma cogently framed the American dilemma – and challenge. We celebrate democracy as the template for governance. As Mr. Friedman aptly suggests, one can never count out a society that fosters dreamers and innovation. Yet this piece begs the question has democracy become cannibalistic? Have we become a society in which ideas, dreams and vision are allowed to foster and develop in an ethereal world, but then die or morph into something else as the political realities impose their will? As Mr. Friedman pointed out the left has issues with the pace, and breadth of change that is being produced by the Obama Administration, yet the left’s angst overlooks in my opinion, that our current system is designed to deliver marginal change at best.
In a most recent blog that responded specifically to Arianna Huffington’s assertion that President Obama has become “timid” I wrote that “The intractability of the status quo, the pervasive influence of special interests, the widening gulf between the parties and the “dumbing down” of the American voter serve as minefields designed to have a deleterious effect on any progressive legislation” which is to say – I get it. Therefore, my issue is not with the present leadership, but with the system that produces leaders. Mr. Friedman concludes his piece by saying we need better leaders, et al, I would revise his conclusion to say that we need a better system.
My vision of a better system would include term limits for both Houses of Congress, and a one year six year term for the President. I also feel that other reforms are needed to limit the pervasive influence of special interests, and the political courage not to allow special interest groups to hide behind First Amendment free speech guarantees to do their political dirty work. Until we awaken to the reality that as currently configured, our system of governance is broken beyond repair, and develop the will to make systemic changes, our leadership and political apparatus will reflect the will of the dream killers not the vision of dream makers.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/22/opinion/22friedman.html?em
Thomas Friedman’s piece titled Advice from Grandma cogently framed the American dilemma – and challenge. We celebrate democracy as the template for governance. As Mr. Friedman aptly suggests, one can never count out a society that fosters dreamers and innovation. Yet this piece begs the question has democracy become cannibalistic? Have we become a society in which ideas, dreams and vision are allowed to foster and develop in an ethereal world, but then die or morph into something else as the political realities impose their will? As Mr. Friedman pointed out the left has issues with the pace, and breadth of change that is being produced by the Obama Administration, yet the left’s angst overlooks in my opinion, that our current system is designed to deliver marginal change at best.
In a most recent blog that responded specifically to Arianna Huffington’s assertion that President Obama has become “timid” I wrote that “The intractability of the status quo, the pervasive influence of special interests, the widening gulf between the parties and the “dumbing down” of the American voter serve as minefields designed to have a deleterious effect on any progressive legislation” which is to say – I get it. Therefore, my issue is not with the present leadership, but with the system that produces leaders. Mr. Friedman concludes his piece by saying we need better leaders, et al, I would revise his conclusion to say that we need a better system.
My vision of a better system would include term limits for both Houses of Congress, and a one year six year term for the President. I also feel that other reforms are needed to limit the pervasive influence of special interests, and the political courage not to allow special interest groups to hide behind First Amendment free speech guarantees to do their political dirty work. Until we awaken to the reality that as currently configured, our system of governance is broken beyond repair, and develop the will to make systemic changes, our leadership and political apparatus will reflect the will of the dream killers not the vision of dream makers.
Friday, November 20, 2009
Going "Hood" on Arianna Huffington
In the hood when a sentence is started with “I’m gonna need you” it usually doesn’t end well for the recipient. So I am going to have to go there – Arianna Huffington, I am going to need you to stand the hell down. For the past year starting with the period immediately after the 2008 election when then President Elect Barack Obama was constructing his cabinet, through the present, the constant whining by some on the left has been a constant source of irritation. Last November in a blog titled Memo to the Left – I offered that part of the ingredients of change that President Obama represents includes the restoration of competence, transparency, and the restoring America’s global standing. By all accounts the Obama Administration has taken positive steps in those directions. This summer in a blog titled Managing a Big Tent, I wrote that for Barack Obama to govern effectively he would need to take a more centrist and pragmatic approach. Finally this summer in another piece, I noted that as the Republican Party strategy is centered on obstructionism with respect to health care, President Obama should eschew any attempt to seek bipartisan support, in favor of a health reform bill that closely mirrors the plan he ran on. In that light, I agreed with many on the left. That said, when Ms Huffington on her recent blog, inferred that President Obama his been stricken by a bout of timidity, her assertion lacked merit, balance, or proportion. But moreover, her comments suggest that a woman as connected as she seems to be, is either out of touch with the reality of Washington, or more concerned about driving readers to her blog than presenting accurate journalism.
The reality is that President Barack Obama now lives in a dual universe in which he must struggle daily to deliver change in a legislative and political culture that represents the anthesis of change. Change in the idealistic world of a political campaign, often morphs into something else in the political process. The voracity and venom that is coming from the far right are reflection of the change that Barack Obama is pushing. On the right, as health care moves through Congress, the Republican Party sees a bill that is a portal to single payer – ironically the dream of the left – the left sees this potential bill as diminished and not in keeping with the promises of the campaign. Both may be right, which lays the genius of this plan. Health Care is closer to reality that ever before, and even if it passes with a less than “robust” public option, the groundwork will be set to expand it in future years. To throw the health care “baby” out with the “bathwater” because it has been watered down smacks of political suicide. Remember 1994? To have a bill passed in a high stakes environment with competing entities all stalking out their own agenda, takes significant amount of muscle and a high level of political astuteness. The New York Times in a recent article offered that President Obama’s legislative strategy seems to be paying off. And most commentators while acknowledging that the next few weeks are fraught with potential pitfalls, Health Care is now taking on the mantle of inevitability. Moreover, The Wall Street Journal hardly a left leaning publication recently noted the bevy of Democratic initiatives pushed – and passed by the Obama Administration that had been “gathering dust”.
I am not a Barack Obama apologist, syphocant or acolyte. Yet it is extremely tiring, to see the mindless dribble of complaints that comes from the left. Yes, Mr. Obama promised change on the campaign, but change is more than policy, change also includes a Presidency that is now more engaged, more nuanced, more transparent, and much more competent. The Obama Administration represents a new day, yet on the left there are many who view this Presidency through the prism of their own impatience which in effect is a reflection of their own a naiveté – or own incompetence. Those on the left, many long time Washington watchers should be quite familiar with the inner workings of Washington politics. The intractability of the status quo, the pervasive influence of special interests, the widening gulf between the parties and the “dumbing down” of the American voter serve as minefields designed to have a deleterious effect on any progressive legislation. In short, these factors have combined to make progressive change a slumbering, deal cutting process that is often a product of compromise and influence peddling.
For those paying attention, it should be real clear that the ethereal message of change has historically gotten sullied by the political process as proponents of change often are forced to produce change in fits and starts as opposed to a broad stroke of the pen. In 1948 I am certain that many in the Civil Rights community wanted President Truman to push beyond merely segregating the armed forces, and push for breaking the back of Jim Crow. Yet when President Truman signed Executive Order 1099 he opened the floodgates that led to the changes that the Civil Rights community was seeking.
In this light, perhaps a reexamination of the Obama mission may be needed, not by diminishing his role or impact as a change agent, but rather celebrating the fact that the Obama administration is a portal to progress, as future administrations will be able to build upon the foundations laid by Barack Obama. This is not a perfect President, this is not a perfect world, and no administration has been able to inoculate itself from mistakes, and errors, yet no administration in my lifetime inherited a catastrophic mess brought on by years of mismanagement, neglect, and incompetence. The American patient was hemorrhaging internally, and disrespected externally. The Administration of Barack Obama has been forced to make choices that start goes from the range of bad to worse. Tough choices in tough times. Any President is fair game on the issues of policy, and substance, I have no issue with that, but to assert that the Obama Administration is abandoning, or betraying the progressive movement because he is “timid is in my view a cheap shot. So Ms Huffington and those on the left, I am gonna need you to develop a better sense of history, proportion, and context, as you critique the administration of Barack Hussein Obama if not, it will be extremely hard to take your diatribes seriously.
The reality is that President Barack Obama now lives in a dual universe in which he must struggle daily to deliver change in a legislative and political culture that represents the anthesis of change. Change in the idealistic world of a political campaign, often morphs into something else in the political process. The voracity and venom that is coming from the far right are reflection of the change that Barack Obama is pushing. On the right, as health care moves through Congress, the Republican Party sees a bill that is a portal to single payer – ironically the dream of the left – the left sees this potential bill as diminished and not in keeping with the promises of the campaign. Both may be right, which lays the genius of this plan. Health Care is closer to reality that ever before, and even if it passes with a less than “robust” public option, the groundwork will be set to expand it in future years. To throw the health care “baby” out with the “bathwater” because it has been watered down smacks of political suicide. Remember 1994? To have a bill passed in a high stakes environment with competing entities all stalking out their own agenda, takes significant amount of muscle and a high level of political astuteness. The New York Times in a recent article offered that President Obama’s legislative strategy seems to be paying off. And most commentators while acknowledging that the next few weeks are fraught with potential pitfalls, Health Care is now taking on the mantle of inevitability. Moreover, The Wall Street Journal hardly a left leaning publication recently noted the bevy of Democratic initiatives pushed – and passed by the Obama Administration that had been “gathering dust”.
I am not a Barack Obama apologist, syphocant or acolyte. Yet it is extremely tiring, to see the mindless dribble of complaints that comes from the left. Yes, Mr. Obama promised change on the campaign, but change is more than policy, change also includes a Presidency that is now more engaged, more nuanced, more transparent, and much more competent. The Obama Administration represents a new day, yet on the left there are many who view this Presidency through the prism of their own impatience which in effect is a reflection of their own a naiveté – or own incompetence. Those on the left, many long time Washington watchers should be quite familiar with the inner workings of Washington politics. The intractability of the status quo, the pervasive influence of special interests, the widening gulf between the parties and the “dumbing down” of the American voter serve as minefields designed to have a deleterious effect on any progressive legislation. In short, these factors have combined to make progressive change a slumbering, deal cutting process that is often a product of compromise and influence peddling.
For those paying attention, it should be real clear that the ethereal message of change has historically gotten sullied by the political process as proponents of change often are forced to produce change in fits and starts as opposed to a broad stroke of the pen. In 1948 I am certain that many in the Civil Rights community wanted President Truman to push beyond merely segregating the armed forces, and push for breaking the back of Jim Crow. Yet when President Truman signed Executive Order 1099 he opened the floodgates that led to the changes that the Civil Rights community was seeking.
In this light, perhaps a reexamination of the Obama mission may be needed, not by diminishing his role or impact as a change agent, but rather celebrating the fact that the Obama administration is a portal to progress, as future administrations will be able to build upon the foundations laid by Barack Obama. This is not a perfect President, this is not a perfect world, and no administration has been able to inoculate itself from mistakes, and errors, yet no administration in my lifetime inherited a catastrophic mess brought on by years of mismanagement, neglect, and incompetence. The American patient was hemorrhaging internally, and disrespected externally. The Administration of Barack Obama has been forced to make choices that start goes from the range of bad to worse. Tough choices in tough times. Any President is fair game on the issues of policy, and substance, I have no issue with that, but to assert that the Obama Administration is abandoning, or betraying the progressive movement because he is “timid is in my view a cheap shot. So Ms Huffington and those on the left, I am gonna need you to develop a better sense of history, proportion, and context, as you critique the administration of Barack Hussein Obama if not, it will be extremely hard to take your diatribes seriously.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
