« Cheney's Hit Squad? | Home | How Israelis see the Wall vs. how the rest of the world sees the Wall »
Why Doesn't Obama Call Republicans Out For Wanting America To Fail?
I watched the Sunday shows.
The GOP is openly saying not only that the economy is failing under Obama but that it's his fault. New line: he owns the economy now.
When, dear God, will the Dems just point out(1) that the Republicans destroyed the Clinton economy and (2) that it is utterly unpatriotic to openly wish for more Americans to lose their jobs and their homes just to help them in the midterms.
The Republican party wants America to fail. Fer chrissake say it.
IT"S not just Republicans either. Sen. Bob Menendez is blocking Obama's ambassador nominee to Mexico because he favors normalization with Cuba. The Cuba lobby is AIPAC on steroids.
Advertisement
great link. thanks for it.
Obama seems to be getting along without the Republicans very nicely, thankyouverymuch. I hope the entire population notices, when things start turning around, who helped it happened and who hindered.
July 12, 2009 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
This was entirely predictable so I don't know why they weren't ready to push back. They should have stayed on offense. They need lots more FDR and lots more Krugman. And haven't we had enough of the Carville and wife act?
I almost never take issue with Rich but he's wrong today when he says
"Most important, she stands for a genuine movement: a dwindling white nonurban America that is aflame with grievances and awash in self-pity as the country hurtles into the 21st century and leaves it behind. "
FDR may have been an east coast elitist but he knew how to talk like a populist and if Democrats can't do that they're going to be in trouble as this recession is going to be long and deep. Blaming the victims won't cut it.
July 12, 2009 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rich who and where is this quote from?
July 12, 2009 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oops, sorry I forgot to include the link.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/12/opinion/12rich.html
July 12, 2009 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama is not FDR, and 2009 is not 1936. In fact, FDR was giving a campaign speech in an election year, and Obama did that well in 2008, but campaigning is not governing.
We live in a media age. President Obama, by virtue of his personality, uses the media to win the electorate to his side not by denouncing the other side, but by appearing wiser, more reasonable, and more interested in the national welfare than they are. Given the access these days that both sides have to broadcast media and the Internet, that is probably a good call.
I'm aware that Rush Limbaugh claimed he wanted Obama to fail, but most Republicans immediately distanced themselves from that position. Their claim, unsurprisingly, is that they want America to succeed and that Obama's policies are likely to fail. They are pinning their political hopes on his failure, but would never acknowledge that publicly.
Their strategy is a risky one, but it's the only one they have. If the economy is on the way up by the 2010 elections, Republican gains are likely to be minimal. If we are doing well by 2012, Obama would likely be reelected by a wide margin. There's much ground between now and then, but while that makes predictions hazardous, it's also a cause for patience. Even by late 2009, I wouldn't be surprised to see signs of encouraging economic resurgence. At that point, the claims of failure may begin to sound hollow.
July 12, 2009 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you don't want him channeling FDR, then at least let him channel LBJ. Since he's already doing LBJ in Asia, let him start playing LBJ on domestic legislation.
If you want to talk governing, Obama might start by knocking heads at the agencies so they get the stimulus money spent. They can tie contracts up for years when they're convinced their highest calling is following every last regulation to the point of absurdity (see Katrina for reference).
July 12, 2009 12:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
MJ doesn't bother making a distinction between wanting Obama to fail and wanting America to fail.
In fact, a distinction would destroy his specific intent: to create outrage by implying that Obama IS America and anyone who disagrees with Obama isn't.
He won't put a disclaimer on his post that he wanted Bush to fail, for 8 years. That James Carville told the reports on the morning of September 11, 2001 that he didn't want Bush to suceed. That in 2006, 51% of registered Democrats wanted Bush to fail, while the country 2-to-1 wanted him to suceed.
MJ is just a partisan hack, a Fox News anchor wannabe who's playing tabloid-style games to stir outrage. And loving it.
July 12, 2009 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, after 9.11 I supported Bush for a year. I flew the flag at my house every day.
The difference. Dems love their country Repubs love it so long as they don't have to an an extra dime in taxes.
July 12, 2009 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Yeah, after 9.11 I supported Bush for a year"
- Thank you for admitting that you wanted America to fail for the whole 7 years.
July 12, 2009 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
You need to take a remedial class in logic.
July 13, 2009 10:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. That's hitting a new low...even for you.
I'm surely not Carville's biggest fan, but it's well documented that his comments were made before the attack and were retracted immediately after hearing the news.
You can argue what it means to hope for a president to fail, but at least try and do it honestly.
July 12, 2009 2:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
"were retracted immediately after hearing the news"
- in other words, if Sept 11 didn't happen, Carville would have continued to publicly speak about his desire for Bush to fail.
BTW (not that it makes any difference) I wanted Bush to fail too, specifically his foreign policy and national defense. And I hope Obama's policies fail, specifically his economic, education and health policy.
Disagreement with policy and hope of its reversal doesn't make me want "America" to fail.
Unless it's MJ's America?
July 12, 2009 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Probably....but at the time we were not in two wars and facing a severe recession/possible depression. You may not see a distinction, but I do.
Regardless, you quite strongly implied that Carville's comments were made after the attacks - which they were not - in order to prove a point. I may disagree with a lot of what you have to say, but I do think you're better that.
July 12, 2009 5:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think you get my point at all.
Carville wanted Bush to fail. MJ wanted Bush to fail. Perhaps you also wanted Bush to fail.
And that was not "wanting America to fail".
But in the age of Obama, wanting the president's policies to fail is un-American.
"You may not see a distinction, but I do. "
July 12, 2009 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think we're having two separate conversations here.
My original post was not to object to your stance on whether or not it is "un-american" to hope for the president's policies to fail. While I may not necessarily agree with your point or your delivery, I think you have some important points to make that should be debated and discussed further. My point was only that your use of Carville's comments to try and make your point was intellectually dishonest.
July 12, 2009 7:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Talk about history repeating!
However, FDR wasn't quite this aggressive to his opposition in his speeches in his first year in office.
July 12, 2009 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Waxman keeps doing it re the climate bill but it's getting little traction...
Waxman: GOP "rooting against" USA
Personally, I'd hold back until it's time to vote on the climate and health care bills then lower the boom on them...
July 12, 2009 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't fire 'til ye sees the whites o' there eyes!
July 12, 2009 4:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
For the next 30 seconds, do NOT think of the word "hippopotamus". Ready, set, GO!
There ars some things beyond the capacity of the human psyche. Wanting to be proved wrong when you have a stake in winning an argument is one of them. The best we can hope for from those with moral integrity is ambivalence - to hope your adversary fails for your sake, and to hope he succeeds for the sake of the country.
I'll settle for that.
July 12, 2009 1:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama's not going to call the Republicans out until after the Health care battle is over no matter who wins. Everything during this first six months in office is geared to that single massive undertaking, and he is not to be distracted by minor irritations on the way. It would just strengthen the conservatives.
That was a mistake that Clinton made. Obama has figured it out and is avoiding picking unnecessary fights right now. It doesn't fit his long term goal, and the panic of the conservatives as nothing they try gains much real purchase is an example of what Obama is doing right.
We are watching a political Aikido master take out his enemies without appearing to attack them. He is letting them expend their forces on him and defeat themselves. Watch and learn.
July 12, 2009 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
You may have indulged in a touch of hyperbole with your references to an Aikido master, but I think you made an excellent point about Obama's priorities. He clearly wants to achieve the big goals first, and then tackle issues that would be just as divisive but less urgent. I hope you're right about the outcome.
July 12, 2009 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope I am too. It's what he did to defeat Hillary for the nomination, and you could see it in the general election also, so I feel reasonably confident this is what's going on.
All the surprise emergencies bequeathed Obama from the previous regime have been a real distraction, and you can't ignore an economy going into a new Depression at a rate equal to that Hoover faced. Nor can you ignore two foreign wars on-going. And the Republicans with their "No - No - No" campaign and media connections are throwing as much sand in the gears as they can. The media is happily cooperating.
So Obama is currently dependent on both Wall Street and the Fed and Treasury for the economy and the Pentagon for the wars. He can't afford enemies in either place, especially since his clear goal is Health Care. Plus, he is still organizing his administration (in the face of a conservative slow-down from the Senate, mostly but not entirely Republican.)
So I'm betting that he is continuing his behavior from the Primary and Election campaigns. He has his eyes on the primary goal and is doing what he can on the distractions by setting priorities and acting on as few distractions as he possibly can, even when it angers his own supporters.
One side effect of this policy is that the Republicans are flailing mightily as thin air, getting nowhere fast and exhausting themselves. I'm pretty sure that the Republican strategists see this pattern also, but they're in no position to anger their base by shifting to strategies and proposals that might be of any effective value. Their decades of running on lies and propaganda has caught up to them, and they have so few firm supporters that they can't afford to abandon the self-defeating faux-populist positions like tax cuts.
And I'll stand by the Aikido reference as being a clearly understood bumper sticker type concept that is ideal for a short post. Anything less black and white would just muddy the reference for a lot of readers. It clarified my already complicated and muddy description.
So that's my reasoning.
July 12, 2009 7:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
"The Republican party wants America to fail. Fer chrissake say it."
Sadly, the actions of BOTH parties show, at the least, any determination to have this nation succeed.
The economy IS important, as is health care, but there will be NO health care or viable economy for commoners if we allow those in power to operate freely without accountability for their actions.
When a nation has fallen so low that it allows illegal wars and torture to exist without serious repercussion to the perpetrators, we have told any and all murderers and egomaniacs that they are a welcome commodity and we would just love to have them oversee this nation.
Guess what folks... they have accepted our invitation..
July 13, 2009 12:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Complacency is killing democrats. They need to go on the offensive, create the headlines, and create the impression that Republicans are failing miserably. This includes President Obama If Democrats wait for the attacks and their only weapon is to provide a reasonable response, we are in trouble.
July 13, 2009 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink