I'm going to take a moment to expound on that.
I've been disappointed in Obama since he appointed his cabinet. Yes, before he even was inaugurated. I saw who he was appointing and as one political hack after another got a post I realized it was going to be business as usual. Change was not going to occur.
I continued to be disappointed in Obama as he caved on every issue dear to his left-leaning base. Conservatives blast him as a "socialist" but that's mere name-calling. His policy suggestions have by and large been centrist if not blatantly right-wing.
*Consider the ill-fated "stimulus." It is essentially trickle-down economics. If we pump money into banks and insure that rich people's taxes stay low, well it will trickle down to job creation.
No, it won't. That failed when Reagan, yes, Ronald Regan about as far from a socialist as one can imagine, tried it. It has failed now.
Consider "Obamacare." While right-wing news attempts to paint it as a massive government intrusion into people's lives, essentially its a massive private company intrusion into people's lives. Granted the gov't says everyone has to have health care (a provision just struck down by a Federal Court, we'll see where this goes), but there was no public option. No alternative to the predatory practices of private health insurance companies that are crushing the American medical system. Obama essentially said to private industry "here, you take care of our health care problem" not a very socialist idea to me.
Also on taxes. Oh those darn "tax and spend" Democrats. Wait, hang on. Obama extended the Bush era tax cuts, and switched around other expiring credits so that they are credited on Social Security taxes. He hasn't raised taxes at all, but the spending that Bush started (and many administrations before him) started keep chugging right away.
Then we get to the national credit default. Obama displayed zero leadership. Well, let me give him his due. He appeared to be leading with the meetings with Boehner until the crazy anti-tax nuts got involved. Then he basically curled up in a ball and cried about those nasty mean ol' Tea Partiers spoiling the plan. A plan that already was essentially a centrist if not right leaning plan!
Did he go on the offensive? Did he instantly roll out a comprehensive plan showing what he felt needed to be done? Did he attack and show the American people he knew how to LEAD and that he wasn't going to let the Grover Norquist robots destroy America?
Nope. He said how upset he was and after a couple days the Democrats rolled out a plan. But honestly, you didn't have a contingency plan going on in case talks broke down? Really?
Obama is essentially Jimmy Carter. A nice, intelligent man who surrounded or allowed himself to be surrounded by party hacks who has NO idea how to lead. He focuses on one issue at a time, and even then not very well, and appears to have no plan, no ideas, no WAY to better our country.
It terrifies me because there is a distinct possibility a Michele Bachmann could end up in the White House.
President Obama, you have about 6 months to show America you know how to lead. You have 6 months until the campaigns kick off in earnest and actual governing falls by the wayside. All is not lost, but if any of that "Change" you talked about is going to occur, it needs to occur NOW.
You can't complain the GOP won't work with you. That's ok. You need to sell your plan, whatever it is, to America and let the American public see that you can lead us back to greatness. However, if you continue to cave, if you continue to waver, if you continue to believe in trickle-down economic policies, you will lose those who supported you in the past, you will not gain new supporters, and you could leave the country in the hands of some very disturbing people.
You have the power. Show us you know what to do with it.
*As was kindly pointed out to me by my brother, I was meshing TARP (which began under Bush, but did have Obama's tacit support during Bush's final days) with the 2009 Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
These are two very different stimulus programs that worked (or failed) in different ways.
I still hold that, as evidenced by Obama's support (or at least lack of will to fight against) for the Bush Era tax cuts, and how much of the stimulus came in the form of tax cuts/refunds/shifting money around etc. that he is far from socialist and often crosses towards the middle right in the policies he supports.
Is some of that pragmatism?
Possibly, but too much pragmatism is what keeps the status quo going.
Thanks to schmichael for pointing out my glaring error.
2 comments:
Note that the stimulus didn't go to banks, that was TARP which was signed into law by Bush:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troubled_Asset_Relief_Program
The stimulus was the 2009 Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Details of where the money went can be found here:
http://www.recovery.gov/Transparency/fundingoverview/Pages/fundingbreakdown.aspx
Definitely not a trickle-down sort of stimulus.
That being said I think you were scarily accurate here:
"Obama is essentially Jimmy Carter. A nice, intelligent man who surrounded or allowed himself to be surrounded by party hacks who has NO idea how to lead."
He has not demonstrated the ability to execute his campaign promises at all. He just gets bolled over at every turn.
"President Obama, you have about 6 months to show America you know how to lead."
Thankfully it seems the international community (w/Obama) may have done the right thing in Libya.
What a sad country we live in that the *liberal* President is the one successfully waging wars... *sigh*
Ah, thanks for pointing that out. I think I knew that (well, I KNOW I did) but in my anger fueled rant I picked a lane and rode with it. I'll make some sort of notation in there.
It merely changes the problem from wrong place back to way too small, but yes, that is an important distinction. Thanks for keeping me as honest as my ill-informed rantings can be.
Post a Comment