IF THE opinion polls are to be believed, Barack Obama is now, six months into his presidency, no more popular than George Bush or Richard Nixon were at the same stage in theirs. His ratings are sagging particularly badly with electorally vital independent voters: two-thirds of them think he wants to spend too much of their money. Two of the most specific pledges he made to the electorate””to reform health care and to produce a cap-and-trade system to curb greenhouse-gas emissions””are in trouble. And an impression is being formed in Washington of a presidency that is far too ready to hand over the direction of domestic policy to Congress; that is drifting either deliberately or lethargically leftwards; and that is more comfortable with lofty visions than details. On the campaign trail Mr Obama showed an impressive ability to change gears. He needs to do so again this summer.
His cause is by no means hopeless. Just as his initial Messianic polling numbers were misleadingly optimistic, his problems should now be put into context. Most obviously, nearly 200 days into office, he has avoided making any horrific mistakes, especially in the fraught business of economic policy. On the hardly insignificant matter of restoring America’s reputation in the world he has delivered a degree of what he promised (though even there the tough times are still ahead of him, as our next leader makes clear). He has had to cope with the worst recession for half a century. He has been curiously ill-served by a press short of useful criticism, with liberal America prepared only to debate what sort of water he walks on best, while conservative radio hosts argue over when exactly he became a communist. And of course, government is darned hard: even when you make the right decision””to close Guantánamo, for instance””it can take years to put into effect.
“…restoring America’s reputation…”
“…to close Guantánamo…”
There are some “interesting” assumptions about reality on the part of the writers which are at least as quirky as their view of our president.
Hope he fails. That’s the hope I can believe in.
Rushing through 1000 page bills that he insists must be passed ‘right now’ or disaster follows, only to have disaster follow anyway. By the way, this is the same behavior he criticized W. for, and yet he is doing it, too.
No, people are seeing that the ‘change’ he promised is not the change they’d hoped for.
It is already clear that he and the Democrats will bankrupt this country. The debacle of “Cash for Clunkers” is just the most obvious in recent days. It makes absolutely no economic or environmental sense. It’s all being done to pay off the autoworker unions and generate false demand for Government Motors and Chrysler (although the foreign car makers are happily taking the government’s money as well).
So we’re spending billions of dollars to subsidize people turning in their old gas guzzlers so they can buy new gas guzzlers. I have smoke coming out of my ears every time I see the commercials on TV saying the government will pay you $4500 to buy a new SUV from GM or Chrysler.
I personally want a pony. I never got one as a kid, but still want one. A real nice pony only costs $1500, which is just a fraction of the cost for a guzzler. Why isn’t government giving me money for a pony?
#2 said “Hope he fails. That’s the hope I can believe in.”
Well, I hope he fails to do all he wants to do. If he succeeds in that, he (and the country) fail in a larger sense.
Which I don’t want (and none of us should).
Let’s hope and pray for governmental deadlock for the next 18 months (it’s probably the best we can get). After the 2010 mid terms, we’ll see . . .
Jim,
While we are at it, how about bringing back the “40 acres and a mule” concept. I’d go for that about now.
Jim Elliott
This is a good graphic example of what’s happening (about 2 1/2 minutes):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5yxFtTwDcc
an admittedly wishful prediction: he is toast.
No, I can’t buy into the “hope he fails” sentiment either. Frankly, I find that appalling.
The two most promises I heard him make weren’t Healthcare and Cap+Trade. The first was to not raise taxes on 95% of America. I don’t see how that’s going to happen the way he’s spending money like there’s no tomorrow. The second was to change the culture of Washington and to bring a new political leadership to America – to put an end to the blame game, to end racial division, to reach across the aisle and stop the politics of division. Instead, he’s acted in a hyper-partisan, race-baiting, fear-mongering, divisive manner – exhibiting the worst tendencies of Dubya, Clinton and Nixon. Frankly, he has so burned bridges, I don’t think he can make it back to where he was on January 20.
President Obama hasn’t even finished his first year in office, so can we please cut him some slack and reserve judgment for a later time when we can objectively consider his successes and failues? I get very frustrated with people and pundits whose criticism is based solely on personal feelings fueled by the venom spewed by Limbaughites and Fox News. Frankly, it is too early to tell whether President Obama is a sucess or failure. Again, how about giving him chance to lead and be President first?
William P. Sulik I cannot disagree with you more. President Obama tried early on to reach across our many divides and I have to say IMO the GOP have resisted strongly.
If this president fails, the country succeeds.
The efforts of this president are designed to make the state sovereign over the individual. When that design is clear, as it was to anyone paying attention way back in the summer of 2008, then to wish for him any modicum of success is to wish serfdom, destruction of liberty and triumphalism to the powers of the monarchial state,
I repeat, assuredly I hope he fails.
“Instead, he’s acted in a hyper-partisan, race-baiting, fear-mongering, divisive manner – exhibiting the worst tendencies of Dubya, Clinton and Nixon.”
These men were race-baiters? Please explain.
gdb in central Texas,
So form my perception of your comment, I guess you firmly believe President Obama is a Communist set out to destroy our country? If any President set out to destroy our country and its values, it was Obama’s predecessor, George W. Bush, and especially his Vice President, Dick Cheney. The former IMHO didn’t have what it takes to be President and the latter will be brought up on War crimes in Hague. Awful, awful man that Dick Cheney.
We christian must engage in political issues in a very christian way, using the scriptures and the prayer book as a guide. Wedding our traditional Christian positions to any American political position (liberal or conservative) or ideology can lead to a very dark place. History is full of “ugly” examples of this very common mistake. Even Billy Graham has acknowledged how he was seduced and used by a certain political posturing during the 70’s.
Pax,
Edward
When one reads posts #[b]10 [/b] and [b]11[/b], it might be asked “Did this person read the article?†[i]The Econimist[/i] is generally a liberal leaning magazine. One major reason for the frustration on the right, and the success of Obama so far, is because he has had a free ride from the American main stream media. That went a long way toward getting him elected. So we should stamp out any media sources that give another view? I know, it is a right wing fantasy that the Bill of Rights has any use in today’s society. Left wing social engineering should protect us all.
Even though [i]The Econimist[/i] article shows many problems pushed under the rug by our own press, it favors taxing employer health insurance benefits. When one makes a decision to work for an employer, this offered benefit may enter into a decision to work for a lower than market salary. So in comes the idea that this now should be taxed. What a total lie and bait and switch to the American people. “Only the very wealthy will have their taxes increased to pay for the plan.â€
And again in post #[b]14 [/b], The previous administration’s priority was to protect our nation from attack. War Crimes? If your opinion prevails, the real war crimes of killing thousands of innocent people and subjugating democracies and people of faith will be the consequence. It is now Obama’s war. We will see if he will step to the plate, or rather worry about exaggerated statements like yours.
Cole,
We Americans must take responsibility for our country. This a a republic. Mr. Obama is charged with executing the laws of the dutifully elected repesentatives of the people of the united states.
Trying to shift the responsobility of our nation to the president or onto congress in the long run is a futile exercise.
Problem, we americans are fickle, amoral and poorly educated. During prosperous times, tolerable traits; during times of crises, civilitation destroying. We christians can be salt and light in the political realm if we live and teach what we believe. My own interest in politics came by way of John Paul II and a very holy monk/theologian who taught political theology at Boston College. We christians can be very Political without being political.
Boniface # 17: I have no idea what your comments have to do with my last post?
Cole,
Using words like Obama’s war or obama turning or not turning the economy around. These are ideas ultimately are illusory. Obama is the chief executive, no more no less. Again the problem in our country is in my house, my neighberhood, my city, my state and then my country. Christianity is very political when it deals with effective human interaction. In short, our government was not and is not the problem.
Cole,
So in your mind I assume the waterboarding tactics ordered by Dick Cheney was justified given we were under attack even though waterboarding is illegal according to the Geneva Convention and an awful terrible torture practice!!!
RE: “After the 2010 mid terms, we’ll see . . .”
Franz — my problem with that is that I don’t see any party raising up principled candidates. We’ve got Republicans out there saying “let’s meet in the middle” on an absolutely GHASTLY healthcare “plan” [sic] that will be hugely expensive AND reduce our quality of care AND proudly ration care.
Needless to say, I won’t be voting for such Republicans. All they are touting is a slower pace for a larger State rather than the speed of the swine herd rushing over the precipice that Obama advocates.
For my own state, that means, for instance, that I won’t be voting for Lindsey Graham, and most likely not for Bob Ingliss — both disastrous and shameful disgraces.
As the demographic data showed post-election — there were a whole bunch of people who had voted Republican in the past who did not vote for McCain — as I pointed out would happen in the 10 months after he won the nomination. And yet the Republican party gave us McCain as their chosen alternative to Obama.
Again — I’d love to think that in the next 16 months we will have a sudden cluster of principled conservatives decide to run for office. But I’m just not seeing that happen yet — and it is, after all, seven months into the two year reign of Obama until 2010.
Sure hope some party comes up with something. Or there will be no relief in 2010.
Perhaps that is what we deserve anyway.
Sorry, Boniface, I still don’t understand your problem. You are quoting things I didn’t say.
I live in an urban area myself. I have a wall full of certificates and awards for community service from law enforcement, city and state government. As to understanding morally difficult issues, I am a war veteran and also have accompanied narcotics detectives on a heroine bust plus worked with the police to eradicate gang violence. In all those cases, I witnessed violence and moral dilemma. I don’t think self defense is a moral dilemma. Though I work in Science and Engineering, I do have an undergraduate degree in Economics and can make an informed statement on policy issues. I have given countless hours to voluntary public service without a political agenda, but presently don’t at all feel represented by my government. And I blame it to a large degree on the press and a current one party controlled situation.
Arab extremism is now the president’s war. Let us see how he fights it. That is just a fact.
Revdons, if you had information that would save thousands of innocent lives because you were intent on conducting stateless sponsored terrorism, I would gladly waterboard you with extreme prejudice. I call it self defense. At the police academy you need to experience the pain of pepper spray. Though very unpleasant, you come out of it unscathed. Our own intelligence operatives and others have experienced waterboarding as part of their training. It was never done routinely to our prisoners as the left might want to imply. How many victims? Personally I think it is a political red herring. With all the evil in this world, you want to focus on fighting against that evil.
Maybe “Arab” extremism is the wrong word. Islamic extremism is a better choice, along with Middle East dictatorships and theocracies.
The Economist is not a “liberal” magazine, except in so far that it is attached to classical, 19th century liberalism. It’s not “liberal” the way, say, the New Statesman or the Nation is liberal. It is European conservative, which does put it to the left of American conservatism.
It is thorough and smart. I’m not sure if it is possible to assess his presidency in real time, but Obama is causing trouble in Washington, and raising the level of debate. He’s been challenged in ways (especially those things that he’s carried over from Bush), that he needs to be challenged. That is a good thing.
It seems that the stimulus package has helped; Hamas has shown peaceful overtures, an violence in Iraq has decreased.
Where does the Economist gets their poll numbers from? should Obama care? Or should he care less, like the former president?
What Obama should be doing, perhaps, is channeling his inner LBJ.
The article is sophisticated enough to point out some challenges for Obama. I think they are, however, underestimating him. We don’t know what, for him, is success.
And, for anybody who is still reading this thread, another perspective . . .
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MzQyZTRhMzFjOTliOTFmYjQ0NTcyNmQ3NGRiYjY4NDg=