Obama Faces Impatient And Unhappy Rumblings On His Left Flank As He Straddles The Center

President Barack Obama has faced stiff opposition and outright denunciations from opponents on his right — and now he’s hearing the beginnings of impatient and increasingly louder rumblings of impatience, discontent and concern on his left.

At issue are a variety of things: a belief that on the stimulus bill Obama got half or even just a quarter loaf of progressives (the old name for liberals) wanted, a feeling that bipartisanship backfired and wasted some of Obama’s political capital and clout, fears that he is being pulled too far to the center when they thought 2009 was to be the beginning of a new progressive era, fears that he was duped and rolled by the GOP into thinking his outreach efforts would pay dividends, and anger over the increasingly powerful role of a handful of GOP moderates in the Senate over the fate of Obama’s — and their — agenda.

It appears that Obama is now being caught in a classic political pincer that is a quintessential risk to politicians who try taking a more centrist or moderate line. The issue isn’t whether Obama can (or should) navigate between the two — on some issues he may tilt more totally to one side or the other — but whether he can navigate the choppy political waters and still arrive at his goal…which he did (more or less) in his stimulus package. But some fear it may be more difficult next time, now that the GOP has mobilized and is giving high-fives over their new solidarity.

Both the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times have stories detailing the concern among Obama’s leftist supporters. These supporters who wanted Obama in the White House for specific reasons now have a sinking feeling that the entrance to what turned out to be “Ideological Fantasyland” is closing and they hope that as Obama treks to “Tomorrowland” it’ll be on their side of The Magical Political Kingdom — and that he won’t be guided by a smiling Arlen Specter.

The Los Angeles Times reports that Obama’s more liberal supporters are starting to worry:

Slowly over the last few weeks, some of Barack Obama’s most fervent supporters have come to an unhappy realization: The candidate who they thought was squarely on their side in policy fights is now a president who needs cajoling and persuading.

Advocates for stem cell research thought Obama would quickly sign an order to reverse former President Bush’s restrictions on the science. Now they are fretting over Obama’s statement that he wants to act in tandem with Congress, possibly causing a delay.

ritics of Bush’s faith-based initiative thought Obama had promised to end religious discrimination among social service groups taking federal money.

But Obama, in announcing his own faith-based program this month, said only that the discrimination issue might be reviewed.

And Obama’s recent moves regarding a lawsuit by detainees have left some liberal groups and Bush critics, including the American Civil Liberties Union, feeling betrayed, given that Obama was a harsh critic of Bush’s detainee policies when running for office last year.

The anxiety is also being felt in the labor movement, one of Obama’s most important support bases. Some union officials and their allies are frustrated that at a crucial point in negotiations over his massive stimulus package, Obama seemed to call for limits on “Buy American” provisions in the bill aimed at making sure stimulus money would be spent on U.S.-made materials.

Obama has been president for less than a month, and his liberal critics concede that the economic crisis has understandably taken the focus off their issues. But some of the issues in play were crucial to building excitement on the left and mobilizing grass-roots support for Obama’s candidacy.

Meanwhile, the Washington Post paints a slightly more cheerful picture of Obama’s supporters on the left. But they still find themselves in Worryland:

As President Obama prepares to sign a $787 billion economic stimulus package today amid gales of Republican criticism of its cost, he is also facing quieter misgivings from liberal Democrats who say the bill does not go far enough — and who are already looking ahead to future legislation that they hope will do more.

Liberal Democrats recognize the package’s scale and accomplishment, and they have defended it against Republican attacks. But they also wonder whether Obama could have used the opportunity of a large congressional majority and a moment of economic emergency to pass a bigger package, with a better chance of boosting the economy and with more of his priorities intact.

As Obama moves on to issues such as health care and energy, liberals are debating how to ensure that the stimulus outcome does not define the outer boundaries of his agenda, so that future legislation is not limited, as the stimulus was, by the demands of centrist senators such as Susan Collins (R-Maine), Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) and Ben Nelson (D-Neb.).

Some say Obama must aim higher next time, so that compromises produce a more satisfactory result. Some say he needs to take greater control of drafting legislation, instead of leaving it to Democratic congressional leaders, and needs to adopt a harder line with Republican legislators. And some say liberals and pro-Democratic interest groups such as labor unions must do a better job of pressuring moderate Republicans and conservative Democrats to back the president.

But is all this second-guessing just that — does it miss a bigger picture?

Former Democratic strategist Bob Shrum, writing in The Week, thinks so:

Not since FDR has a new President achieved such far-reaching change as swiftly as Barack Obama. In office less than a month, he signs a $787 billion emergency stimulus bill into law. And remarkably, almost everything he was criticized for during the battle contributed to his victory.

He was assailed for letting the House Democrats write the bill instead of dispatching his own legislation to the Hill. He supposedly lost control to Speaker Nancy Pelosi and then to Senate Leader Harry Reid. The truth is, the original House version was very close to what the President wanted. Was it really conceivable that the gathering Obama Administration wasn’t constantly conferring with congressional allies? It was beyond naïve to think otherwise—or to suggest that Obama was the passive recipient of a proposal he didn’t favor or largely shape.

Republicans found psychic satisfaction in ritually chanting “Pelosi and Reid” on every cable honkfest, but they were unwittingly playing the President’s game. His apparent margin of separation from the congressional process allowed him to look flexible—and gave him room to maneuver. He swiftly dispensed with the House provision on family planning, a decimal point in the bill, which can readily be included in later appropriations measures. Unlike the Clintons with their health care proposal, he wasn’t forced to defend every element of a precast approach—which made it easier to get pretty much all that he preferred.

Shrum notes that Obama:

1. Could strike a deal with the three GOP moderates in the Senate to get it passed there.
2. Have his chief of staff basically put back most of what was cut out in the Senate when the bill went to conference in the House.
3. Got credit from the public for reaching across the aisle.
4. Enhanced in the polls the standing of Congressional Democrats, whose polling numbers in some polls went up as GOP poll numbers remained in the basement.
5. Was able to finally go public in opposing the GOP in high profile events and not look like a bad guy doing it due to the timing.
6. Was able to couple this with high profile visits to distressed parts of the country.

Shrum concludes:

The Republicans may have found their voice; but it is, in T.S. Eliot’s phrase, “like wind in dry grass.” These are “hollow men” who have nothing else to offer. In contrast, the President is cool, calm, strategic and focused on the critical issues and the long-term. He says correctly that he will be judged by “results.” It’s early, but the early achievement is breathtaking. Obama understands the uses of presidential power. If he brings that insight and the same instinct for what matters to healthcare, energy, and looming challenges like a half-lost war in Afghanistan, he can achieve change we can believe in—and live with for generations. In that case, the Reagan Era will be succeeded by the Obama Era.

Breathtaking or not, there seems to be a method in Obama’s actions — a tactical and strategical approach that may be too early to discern in the opening weeks of his presidency.

And a question becomes: is Obama redefining the center?

One thing is certain: the noses out of joint on the right and left are not just indicative of someone taking a more centrist or moderate stance, but according to a book by historian Gil Troy are akin to characteristics shown by some of the Republic’s most successful Presidents — those who Troy argues skillfully governed by getting things done and creating coalitions using what he calls”muscular moderation.” He includes some of the highest ranked Presidents in these ranks, Republicans and Democrats, liberals and conservatives (such as Ronald Reagan).

Here are a few quotes from Troy’s MUST READ BOOK:

–”Successful presidents appear moderate because their triumphs often forcefully redefine the center, while each failing president misses the center in his own particular way.”
–”The ‘great American center” has a long, proud history of offering a muscular moderation, not a mushy middle.”
–”The President’s job is to preside. And presidents preside most effectively over this diverse country by pursuing centrism rather than riling partisans.’”
–’Center seeking is not pandering; it is community building. Comprising can be courageous, not cowardly..”

And this core quote:

The secret may not lie with any one centrist program or another. But there is great merit in searching for that center, building a broad-based, patriotic commitment to the common good, especially at the presidential level. All or nothing approaches often yield “nothing,” not “all.” Presidents should be game theorists, maximizing benefits for as many as possible, rather than warriors seeking clear victories for their side — and defeats for fellow Americans. Leaders must try building bridges, forging consensus, and playing to the center not to the base; citizens, especially today, need a renewed appreciation of what binds us together as Americans and the county’s many attributes.

In other words:

As Obama walks his own way — with his own walk, and perhaps on a zig-zagging path — to Tomorrowland, even though some on the right and left may disagree…he may not be so goofy.