Options
The New Comeback Kid
· Friday, December 17, 2010
WASHINGTON -- If Barack Obama wins re-election in 2012, as is now more likely than not, historians will mark his comeback as beginning on Dec. 6, the day of the Great Tax Cut Deal of 2010.
Obama had a bad November. Self-confessedly shellacked in the midterm election, he fled the scene to Asia and various unsuccessful meetings, only to return to a sad-sack lame-duck Congress with ghostly dozens of defeated Democrats wandering the halls.
Now, with his stunning tax deal, Obama is back. Holding no high cards, he nonetheless managed to resurface suddenly not just as a player but as orchestrator, dealmaker and central actor in a high $1 trillion drama.
Compare this with Bill Clinton, greatest of all comeback kids, who, at a news conference a full five months after his shellacking in 1994, was reduced to plaintively protesting that "the president is relevant here." He had been so humiliatingly sidelined that he did not really recover until late 1995 when he outmaneuvered Newt Gingrich in the government-shutdown showdown.
And that was Clinton responding nimbly to political opportunity. Obama fashioned out of thin air his return to relevance, an even more impressive achievement.
Remember the question after Election Day: Can Obama move to the center to win back the independents who had abandoned the party in November? And if so, how long would it take? Answer: Five weeks. An indoor record, although an asterisk should denote that he had help -- Republicans clearing his path and sprinkling it with rose petals.
Obama's repositioning to the center was first symbolized by his joint appearance with Clinton, the quintessential centrist Democrat, and followed days later by the overwhelming 81-19 Senate majority that supported the deal. That bipartisan margin will go a long way toward erasing the partisan stigma of Obama's first two years, marked by Stimulus I that passed without a single House Republican and a health care bill that garnered no congressional Republicans at all.
Despite this, some on the right are gloating that Obama had been maneuvered into forfeiting his liberal base. Nonsense. He will never lose his base. Where do they go? Liberals will never have a president as ideologically kindred -- and they know it. For the left, Obama is as good as it gets in a country that is barely 20 percent liberal.
The conservative gloaters were simply fooled again by the flapping and squawking that liberals ritually engage in before folding at Obama's feet. House liberals did it with Obamacare; they did it with the tax deal. Their boisterous protests are reminiscent of the floor demonstrations we used to see at party conventions when the losing candidate's partisans would dance and shout in the aisles for a while before settling down to eventually nominate the other guy by acclamation.
And Obama pulled this off at his lowest political ebb. After the shambles of the election and with no bargaining power -- the Republicans could have gotten everything they wanted on the Bush tax cuts retroactively in January without fear of an Obama veto -- he walks away with what even Paul Ryan admits was $313 billion in superfluous spending.
Including a $6 billion subsidy for ethanol. Why, just a few weeks ago Al Gore, the Earth King, finally confessed that ethanol subsidies were a mistake. There is not a single economic or environmental rationale left for this boondoggle that has induced American farmers to dedicate an amazing 40 percent of the U.S. corn crop -- for burning! And the Republicans have just revived it.
Even as they were near unanimously voting for this monstrosity, Republicans began righteously protesting $8.3 billion of earmarks in Harry Reid's omnibus spending bill. They seem not to understand how ridiculous this looks after having agreed to a Stimulus II that even by their own generous reckoning has 38 times as much spending as all these earmarks combined.
The greatest mistake Ronald Reagan's opponents ever made -- and they made it over and over again -- was to underestimate him. Same with Obama. The difference is that Reagan was so deeply self-assured that he invited underestimation -- low expectations are a priceless political asset -- whereas Obama's vanity makes him always needing to appear the smartest guy in the room. Hence that display of prickliness in his disastrous post-deal news conference last week.
But don't be fooled by defensive style or thin-skinned temperament. The president is a very smart man. How smart? His comeback is already a year ahead of Clinton's.
(c) 2010, The Washington Post Writers Group
Third-party content does not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Patriot Post.
Options
Subscribe
Accuracy in Media Editor Cliff Kincaid: "Mark Alexander is the recipient of the 2007 AIM Award for Grassroots Journalism. It is an honor to be associated with Mark and PatriotPost.US." It's Right. It's Free. Subscribe now!
The Right Opinion
- Arnold Ahlert: Catholics vs. Obama
- Michael Reagan: White House Website Gone Wild
- Ken Blackwell: I'll Have Another
- Jeff Jacoby: The Peace Process Battered Israel's Reputation
- Victor Davis Hanson: The Bad/Good Idea of Removing Assad
- Michael Barone: Cocooned Liberals Are Unprepared for Political Debate
- R. Emmett Tyrrell: The Great Debate
- Cal Thomas: The Media's Religion Deficit
- Larry Elder: Why Jeremiah Wright Matters -- Still
- Ben Shapiro: First, They Came for Cory Booker
- Ann Coulter: Figures Don't Lie: Democrats Do
- Burt Prelutsky: A President Not Fit for Man or Beast
Grassroots Commentary
Policy and Analysis
- Heritage Foundation Insider
- Heritage Foundation Research
- American Enterprise Institute
- Center for Strategic and International Studies
- The Cato Institute
- Hoover Institution
- National Rifle Association
- Ludwig von Mises Institute
- Citizens Against Government Waste
- National Center for Policy Analysis
- The Heartland Institute
Our Mission
"The Patriot's mission is to advocate for Essential Liberty, the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and to promote free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values. Our objective is to provide Patriots across our nation with a touchstone of First Principles through brief, informative and entertaining analyses of relevant news, policy and opinion from reputable research, advocacy and media organizations, so they may better support and defend those Principles, and enlist others to join our ranks." —Mark Alexander, Publisher
The Patriot Post is not sustained by any political, special interest or parent organization, and we accept no advertising. Our mission and operations are funded entirely by the voluntary financial support of Patriots like you!
























Abu Nudnik
Excellent! He is a formidable opponent.
Posted December 17, 2010 at 12:24:56 AM
Jay Dee
Via sports participation long ago, I learned one underestimates one's opponents at one's own peril.
As always, the brilliant Dr. Krauthammer is spot-on.
God Bless and Save our Republic !!
Posted December 17, 2010 at 1:12:21 AM
JTG
Too much is made of Obama's prowess and his being smart. He is neither. He's simply a radical socialist with big money backing him at every step and misstep. I don't think that the people will be fooled twice as we've heard his meaningless rhetoric too often. The election to remove him can't approach quick enough.
Posted December 17, 2010 at 7:45:56 AM
Bert
It's the power behind soetoro that you should be most worried about. This is a very well-designed plan unfolding.
Nearly ten years after 9/11, we have a $14T plus deficit, a rapidly shrinking dollar, record welfare and unemployment, toleration if not amnesty rather than prosecution and deportation of tens of millions of illegal aliens masquerading as citizens and actively voting in our elections, union controls on politics and businesses, mass elimination of US jobs, the sending of millions more jobs to China, encroachments of the Taliban's sharia law into our run-amok courts under the guise of "religious freedom" and repeated suspension of our civil liberties by an increasingly communist government.
Who said those 19 hijackers back on that September didn't win not just their battle but their entire war? Or is it that you just don't recognize either the enemy or America's defeat?
Posted December 17, 2010 at 8:36:40 AM
Infantry
I am on JTG side, Obama would have been much better off if he didn't then turn around and blast everyone for 'making' him compromise. Most American's realize he only compromised because he had to, not because he wanted to.
Unless he changes his tone and demeanor, and really becomes bi-partisan, he's done in 2012 - I certainly will not be beating a penny on his reelection.
Posted December 17, 2010 at 12:15:54 PM
Ron
Once again, Krauthammer comes across as a closet liberal, heaping praise on the buffoon in the White House and predicting his reelection, saying he has moved to the center. He's nowhere near the center, and if CK can't figure that out, he's as stupid as Obama. CK always comes across as condescending, just as do most liberals. The Republicans should have run away from this bill, but they have learned nothing from years of losing the shell game to the Democrats. Clinton is, was, and always will be a draft-dodging communist. He's rich now, but he's still south Arkansas white trash.
Posted December 17, 2010 at 12:20:22 PM
veritaseequitas
Pah, Charles!! You give him way too much credit. I agree that you should "keep your friends close and your enemies closer," in order not to underestimate them. However, BO made it very clear both in words and expression that he was accepting the tax bill under duress - I simply do not believe this cretin will ever go center as Bill "The Adulterer" Clinton did. I think it would make him physically sick to attempt to do so. And so, hopefully, the independents and others who voted for him in 2008 will see through any charade he puts up at this point. I think BO is going to have some competition in his own camp for 2012, namely HRH Hillary.
Posted December 17, 2010 at 12:37:33 PM
karl anglin
There seem to me to be very
few facts, at least ascertainable
facts, in politics.---Sir Robert Peel
(1778-1850)
Posted December 17, 2010 at 12:47:54 PM
Jan
I agree with some of your response commentators, that if President Obama was truly going to move to the center, he would not have called Republicans " hostage takers". This is no way to get bipartisanship, nor truly an indication he fells any other way than he did before he refused to "compromise". He only tried to make this deal because he saw the writing on the wall, come January. Plus, there was no admission he and his Democratic, or something else I won't say here, no growth policies had failed all Americans! Not to mention his lack of TRANSPARENCY repeatedly, which he seems to think if he says he wants, Americans are STUPID enough to fall for. Just look at the Mexican-American border violence, killing now on the American side, doing zero about that; all of Eric Holder's not fighting the terrorists,as well as President Obama's refusal to even call them Terrorists. Sorry, Dr. Krauthamer, you're wrong on this one.Former President Clinton really did move to the middle, unlike this President.
Posted December 17, 2010 at 3:27:57 PM
Mark
Obama will lose part of his base.
He lost me.
Posted December 18, 2010 at 5:20:18 PM
David Ross
My interpretation of what Charles K. said is pretty much a slam on the Republicans. And he is right the Republicans really lost out, no acually the American people lost out. The article is a breakdown of how obama is trying to get reelected and he is on the way to doing it. Charles K. doesn't strike me as liberal with this article or has he in the past, he is just laying out the facts as they happened and will likely happen. Hopefully the We the people of the United States will not only oust obama and the liberals but also the old guard of the Replublican party. The tax bill was a loss for the American People because the Republicans gave away to much, way to much and are spinning it as a win. The Republicans got the status quo and gave up a lot more than they got. Basically the American People have what they had last year except for the fact of a 2% decrease in payroll taxes. For those who think I am a liberal I cannot change your thinking, but for the record I am a Conservative Independent. I have never believed a word of what the liberals said especially barry obama. As in 2006 when I first started hearing about b.o. I thought of him as a lying cheat and my thoughts have only grown stronger with each passing year. If we can't change the present old guard replublicans then we will again have to suffer another 4 years of b.o. and his country destroying policys. Just my .5 cents David Ross concerned citizen
Posted December 19, 2010 at 9:22:20 AM
JJStryder
If Obama is on a "comeback" it is because of gutless Republicans unwilling to fight. It was the spending that was the issue that gave them back their bravado that they so quickly blew off. Only a RHINO would have thought this a great deal. Shows we still have much work to do. As Rush has said we still have the same Republican leadership that we had during Bush. And we know how that turned out.
Posted December 21, 2010 at 10:10:52 AM
p3orion
"I don't think that the people will be fooled twice as we've heard his meaningless rhetoric too often." -- JTG
Sadly, our elected Republican Senators and Congressmen have repeatedly shown that they can be fooled over and over again...
Posted December 21, 2010 at 3:08:54 PM
Scott
Obama may be fool, but don't underestimate him. The Republicans need to get a solid leader that can bring the party together. Romney's viewed as an elitist, Palin scares people, McCain's too old, Huckabee is a loser, so who do we have that can galvanize the right and middle? The RNC needs to get rid of Steele, and get somebody that can think strategically on this most important issue.
Posted December 23, 2010 at 12:04:13 PM
Cylar
"Despite this, some on the right are gloating that Obama had been maneuvered into forfeiting his liberal base. Nonsense. He will never lose his base." It's not nonsense.They can stay home or vote for a third party candidate - just like the GOP base does when we are handed a RINO squish to vote for in the primaries or general election. Nowhere to go, my foot. Krauthammer is wrong yet again - and even if he's right, all it means is that the establishment Republicans in the lame-duck Congress are exactly the kind of spineless weenies that the voters endeavored to eject in the last election. It doesn't say anything about Obama's newfound centrism or ability to woo opponents. Good riddance to this sort of "compromise." It's time to hold the line against more government spending or further erosion of our liberties and values.
Posted December 28, 2010 at 4:18:18 AM
Charlee
I love reading these articles because they're short but ifonratmive.
Posted November 8, 2011 at 4:45:37 PM