PRESIDENT OBAMA – HEADED FOR “ONE AND DONE?

The last time a news show begun by giving a countdown of the number of days in a particular crisis was in 1979 when what we know now as Nightline first named America Held Hostage, was spawned by the taking of American Hostages in Iran. Not many in my generation will ever forget the raw images of American impotency as Ted Koppel provided nightly commentary on an event that many viewed as something that could never happen to a country as strong as powerful as ours. I think of that crisis and its coverage, and I am reminded of the current crisis in the gulf. Today, many observers especially those whose historical or political POV is either too stunted or too slanted to have perspective, rushed in to call the crisis in the gulf - President Obama’s Katrina. In either case whether shunted or slanted, the Katrina analogy is erroneous and for Obama supporters a dangerous miss-reading of history. It was the 22nd amendment, not Hurricane Katrina that ended the reign of George Bush. Now to be sure, President Bush was unpopular in 2008, as the Obama election was ultimately a referendum of the Bush government and the images of Katrina became an unseemly albatross around John McCain’s neck. Yet the expectations for George Bush were never high as he was viewed by many as an incompetent puppet.
Conversely, Barack Obama’s campaign spoke of a man of intelligence, cool under fire, brimming with confidence, and the capacity to deliver change – the Obama Administration would represent a sea change from Bush Administration on many levels, most importantly in the area of management, governance and competence. Hence, on the eve of the 2008 election General Colin Powell endorsed Candidate Obama on Meet the Press stating that Barack Obama possessed the “intellectual vigor” to lead the nation. I agreed with Colin Powell’s assessment, yet I also understood that then Senator Joe Biden was right, the next President would be tested, thus in my piece Why Obama I wrote:

“No American President will be able to inoculate themselves from the unknown and unforeseen threats whether they are foreign, domestic, or natural.”

Only time will tell if the best work of the Obama Administration will be able to inoculate him from the wrath of America which now obsesses over the gulf spill in the gulf. The vitriol stemming from this event leaves little doubt in my mind that as this crisis grows it could ultimately undermine the Obama Presidency. Already the Obama narrative of competence is threatened. The fortunes of American Presidents in times of crisis are often dependant on how America reacts in those moments. Two useful barometers to gauge the tenor and tone of our respond are our national psyche and the political climate as each crisis unfolds. For example, William Jefferson Clinton’s narrow escape from being convicted – let’s we forget he was impeached - lay in the fact Bill Clinton’s administration made us feel good as a country, the dot.com boom was in full swing, Wall Street was reaching dizzying new heights, and “Bubba” was charming, engaging - and human. Therefore we were willing to view his impeachment trial as a political witch hunt and not a “cancer” on the Presidency. Our obsession over the Lewinsky scandal was due more to our natural voyeuristic impulses than anything else.

Other Presidents have not been so fortunate. In March of 1968 after being humiliated in the New Hampshire Primary by an anti war candidate from his own party, Eugene McCarthy, and the ever present threat of a Robert Kennedy candidacy, President Lyndon Johnson announced he would not seek his party’s nomination. The role of the media was critical in framing the debate. By the late sixties, the national media was no longer a benign political partner of the status quo, as whether by design or by accident, they became an instrument of peace. Americans were bombarded nightly as evening news continued to show images of American soldiers coming home in caskets. For young men and women to die in a far away country, in an undeclared war was too much for a proud nation to bear. And when the unimpeachable voice of them most “trusted” man in America Walter Conkrite turned on the Johnson Administration, it became clear that President Johnson’s prosecution of the Vietnam War challenged his capacity to lead so much so, that not even the domestic success of the Great Society could not save him.
While Afghanistan always has the potential to be President Obama’s Vietnam, yet, when I think of this current crisis facing the Obama Administration I am reminded not of Katrina or Vietnam but of the Iranian crisis that brought down the Carter Administration. American in 1979 was still wounded by Vietnam and Watergate. That pervasive sense of doom and gloom, coupled with yet another blow to our national ego, and our inability to resolve the issue confirmed for many that the well intended, and highly intelligent President Jimmy Carter was simply in over his head. As such three days after the Iranian Hostage crisis began Jimmy Carter, like the embattled Lyndon Johnson in 1968 faced an insurgent threat within his own party by the name of Teddy Kennedy. Jimmy Carter ultimately garnered his party’s nomination, but the damage was done, as in November of 1980, America turned to Ronald Reagan in hopes of restoring national pride.

At the beginning of the Obama Presidency there were comparisons to Lincoln, Roosevelt, and John F. Kennedy. In making those comparisons, I wonder if we overlooked a more natural comparison to another outsider – James Earl Carter. Like Barack Obama, the country inherited by Jimmy Carter was still reeling from the malfeasance of prior administrations, a Middle East tinderbox and growing dependence on foreign oil. Like President Obama, Jimmy Carter brought to Washington a combination of insiders – holdovers from prior Democratic administrations, as well as many of his cronies from Georgia. Like Barack Obama, Jimmy Carter’s centrist approach angered liberals hankering for a reversal of Republican policies. Like Barack Obama, President Carter, was viewed as an intelligent, thoughtful alternative to his bumbling predecessor.

Yet what should set off alarm bells within the Obama White House, is that President Carter was undone by events outside of his control, and a perception that the office was too big for him. In the summer of 1979 President Carter gave a televised speech given from the Oval Office, a national address now maligned as the “Malaise” speech. Rather than inspiring confidence, President Carter’s words exacerbated the country’s declining self confidence. If that was not bad enough, on November 4th, 1979 the events that ultimately brought down the Carter Presidency took place far away in Tehran Iran. Inspired by the Iranian Holy man Ayatollah Khomeini, Iranian students stormed the American embassy, holding several Americans hostage for 444 days. Those hostages were not released until Ronald Wilson Reagan was sworn in January 20, 1981. The fact that the current oil spill crises draws parallels to a crisis which captivated a nation, became an incendiary national obsession, and created the impression of an impotent commander and chief should give President Barack Obama more than pause.

Like the daily images of the blindfolded hostages, that seared in the American psyche, the images of oil spewing from the gulf, and oil slicked wildlife, are creating a huge problem for Barack Obama. As in the times of President Carter, America is suffering through a major crisis of confidence. Beset by high unemployment, a shrinking middle class, the specter of the 21st century being dominated by Asia, massive debt and with a deteriorating ecosystem, fear abounds. In addition to natural fears that stem from an uncertain future, the combination of a toxic political system and unrelenting 24 hour media cycle makes it almost impossible for the Obama administration to stay ahead of the news curve and abate the negativity. Part of the tough sledding that team Obama faces is the reality that being President is worlds apart from running for it. They are learning what every President has to learn - the cheers of the campaign trail quickly give way to the tough world of real time governance. As such, the pace of governing is like the pace of campaigning on steroids. Never more so than in this new media world order, where news is dispensed at a rapid fire pace, and where rationality often gives way to paranoia. To be sure this barrage of criticism toward President Obama is in some ways unfair. Barack Obama inherited an oil regulatory system from a pro oil administration, as a result oil companies like BP were given free rein to do business with little threat of any serious government oversight. In addition, President Obama took office with a cornucopia of issues that included two wars, an economic meltdown, an automobile industry on life support, and a bevy of campaign promises to keep.

With all that realistically the best that President Obama could hope for was that his Energy and Interior Cabinets secretaries ran their shop efficiently, cleaned house from the largess of the prior administration, and by doing so – protect their principal. Now it is tragically clear the pace of change within those areas was not quick enough, and the scope of change not wide enough to prevent the BP disaster. In hindsight even a complete overhaul may not have stopped the oil spill from happening, unfortunately for President Obama the wisdom of hindsight usually comes too late to salvage damaged Presidencies.

Ironically in today’s inflamed current political climate, the country that rejected the cowboy tendencies of George Bush and John McCain seem to long for those days of shoot first and ask questions later. President Obama’s approach to many seemed tepid, and ineffective. His approach to have the “smartest guys” in the room to resolve the issue has gone over with the same impact of BP’s “top kill” strategy. The only concession that President Obama’s critics offer they don’t expect him to personally “go down there” and plug the leak. Beyond that back handed concession, the criticisms are wide and varied. First there are those who say his Administration acted to slowly, or that they trusted BP too much, or how the Obama Administration has consistently ignored assistance that was offered, or rejected advice from local gulf leaders, and finally President Obama was not mad enough. In short President Obama is failing to exercise leadership. Conversely when President Obama has acted, he was criticized for “shaking down” the oil companies, or that he is doing more harm than good with his moratorium on new deep water drilling, and when he gave his first Oval Office speech, and he was lambasted for lacking specificity. All complaints, deservedly or not, right or wrong, rational or irrational this underscores the danger that his administration faces.

President Obama has walked a political tightrope since his election in, as his centrist approach angered many on the left from the beginning – and from the right, and he has faced nothing short of obstructionism. As President Obama pushed forward with his agenda items often his change message failed to compete with the scare tactics from the right, and as the tea party movement grew, many independents begin to have second thoughts about their 2008 support for President Obama. Now comes the gulf oil crisis. In 1979 Jimmy Carter spoke to a nation looking for a confidence boost, they came away feeling more diminished, and eighteen months later he was “one and done”.

During the 2008 campaign Barack Obama worked extremely hard to combat the perception that he was unfit, too inexperienced, and too cerebral to be an effective leader. They were effective in turning that "weakness" on its head. By contrasting the "cool hand Luke persona of Barack Obama to the petulant impatient John McCain; the Obama campaign got a lot of currency on the issue of temperament. In the financial meltdown crisis that came in the wake of the Lehman Brothers collapse in what Colin Powell called the “final exam” candidate Obama’s nuanced approach was contrasted to what seemed to be “erratic” behavior by Senator John McCain. Now what worked in 2008, seems to be losing its appeal as the oil continues to gush. Barack Hussein Obama entered the Presidency with the winds of change at his sails, now he faces a crisis of confidence in his leadership, with unemployment numbers most certainly to be troublesome in 2012, unless Barack Obama generates a change in America’s perception of him, like James Earl Carter in 1980, Barack Hussein Obama may be headed for a “one and done” Presidency.