With Absolute Power, Team Obama Grows Stupid

· Thursday, February 11, 2010

How could such smart people do so many stupid things? That question, or variations on it, is being asked in Washington and around the country about the Obama administration.

The same people who directed the campaign that defeated Hillary Clinton and routed John McCain, a campaign that raised far more money and attracted far more volunteers than any before it, have within a year come up with a legislative program that is crashing in ruins and that, to judge from recent polls, has left the Democratic Party weaker than I have seen it in almost 50 years of closely following politics.

The 2008 campaign was an impressive achievement. So, in a negative way, is the 2009 legislative program that has left the Democrats in such woeful shape in 2010.

Some in Washington say that the problem is that Barack Obama has chosen to rely on his campaign staff rather than the wise old heads in Washington. But Obama and his team has had the benefit of advice from those wise old heads and from the smartest political strategist the Democratic Party has produced in the past half-century, Bill Clinton.

A truly wise Washington analyst, National Journal's Jonathan Rauch, says the problem is one-party government. Presidents lead better, he argues, when they are constrained by the need to get bipartisan support.

There's something to that. Obama's three predecessors all had bipartisan initiatives: the 1990 tax package for George Bush 41, NAFTA approval for Clinton, the 2001 education bill and the 2003 Medicare prescription drug benefit for George Bush 43. Obama has had no bipartisan initiatives of his own.

The fact that Democrats, from last July until last week, had a 60-vote supermajority in the Senate to go along with Nancy Pelosi's strong majority in the House seems to have tempted Team Obama to go the all-Democratic route on health care, cap-and-trade and fiscal policy. But even strong temptations should sometimes be resisted.

I think the problem is more basic and helps to explain why the people who put together a successful campaign have not, so far at least, provided successful governance.

Obama campaigned as someone who would rise above partisan divisions. He first attracted national attention in 2004, when our politics was a kind of culture war, by stressing what red state America and blue state America had in common. He campaigned in a similar vein in 2007 and 2008.

But when he came to office in 2009, the cultural issues that had occupied so much of the political landscape for a dozen years had been eclipsed in importance by the financial crisis and the deepening recession.

So Obama was faced with a fundamental choice. He could either chart a bipartisan course in response to the economic emergency, or he could try to expand government to Western European magnitude as Democratic congressional leaders, elected for years in monopartisan districts, had long wished to do.

The former community organizer and Chicago pol chose the latter course.

To the surprise of many who watched previous presidents present specific administration policies to Congress, he allowed Democratic leaders to design the stimulus package they rushed into law in six weeks.

One-third of the money went to state and local governments -- an obvious payoff to the public employee unions that contributed so much money to Democrats -- and much of it went to permanently increase the baseline spending of discretionary programs, a longtime goal of Democratic congressional leaders.

Federal spending was raised from about 20 percent to about 24 percent of gross domestic product, putting the U.S. on a trajectory to double the national debt as a percentage of GDP in less than 10 years.

Team Obama overestimated the stimulative effect of the stimulus package and underestimated the strength of the spontaneous tea party movement that flared up in protest of this expansion of government.

They underestimated as well the opposition to expanding government control over health care and, through the cap-and-trade bill, to the energy sector. And the disgust over conspicuous vote-buying on health care -- the Louisiana Purchase, the Cornhusker Kickback, the Labor Loophole.

Team Obama failed to realize they were no longer running in Chicago or in the Democratic primaries or facing an electorate fed up with Republicans. And, more important, they failed to realize that vastly expanding government goes deeply against the American grain -- and against the basic appeal of their successful campaign.

COPYRIGHT 2010 THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM


Third-party content does not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Patriot Post.


Comments

Ruth Ann Wilson

"But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.

BUT continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of,(Constitution, Declaration of Independence, Ten Commandments of Almighty God), knowing of whom thou hast learned them, (All the Beloved Founders, wise Veterans, and Patriots.) II Timothy 3: 13,14

How firm a foundation has been laid for US.

For God & Country

Ruth Ann Wilson

Posted February 11, 2010 at 9:45:45 AM


veritaseequitas

You really give BO too much credit Mr. Barone. I for one, believe that BO intentionally lied about and/or omitted his evil intentions for this nation while he was campaigning. He would never have won the election otherwise. He never was a bi-partisan centrist, is not going to turn into one now, and has no interest in anything other than a big government takeover of this country.

To say that "The former community organizer and Chicago pol chose the latter," suggests that this fart bubble had to make a tough decision about how he was going to proceed. Not so. The reality is that BO and his despicable left wing liberal posse believe themselves to be above the fray and smarter than us God & gun clingers. Well, we will see who has the last laugh this year and in 2012.

Posted February 11, 2010 at 6:24:01 PM


John Eckenrod

"How could such smart people do such stupid things?"

This otherwise good article opens with what is now a tiresome ritual: paying homage to Obama and his smartness or brilliance.

He has shown no signs of either, except getting elected, which was really taking the "Democrats turn" in the American election cycle. Ivy league education?

Yeah, Bush did too and nobody zapped any political correctness into his introductions.

Posted February 15, 2010 at 11:32:06 AM


MelP

Misery and suffering are directly proportional to the funds (money) set aside for its relief! Job creation is the best charity for humankind. Work teaches us patience, tolerance and many other virtues that the idle will never know!

Posted February 15, 2010 at 12:30:24 PM


Ray

Isn't Smart people and Washington an oxymoron.

Really like your column.

Posted February 15, 2010 at 4:19:33 PM


Post a Comment

Please keep comments civil and brief. Obscene, profane, abusive and off-topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked.

(required, displayed)
(required, not displayed)
Facebook Twitter YouTube RSS Connect with The Patriot Post






Our Mission

To Support and Defend -- Read The Patriot Post -- It's Right. It's Free. -- www.patriotpost.us

"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!

Support The 2012 Patriot Fund