Memo To Obama Bashers: I’m Scared & Angry Too, But Please Back Off
The inevitable piling on the Barack Obama presidency is well underway — and well too prematurely.
Consider that Obama has been in office for not even two thirds of the mythic 100 days by which new presidents are prejudged. Consider that we had been sabotaged by domestic terrorists in the form of the Bush administration and that the damage it wrought will take years to undo. Consider that no president since FDR has inherited as immense an economic crisis, as well as several other crises, including a health-care system on the verge of collapse and two wars.
Obama will have plenty of opportunity to prove that he doesn’t have the chops, let alone the hired guns, to face down these crises.
That spending our way out of a moribund economy is not the right path to recovery.
That raising taxes on the wealthy and beginning to close an income gap that is at the heart of many societal ills is penny wise but pound foolish.
That ridding institutions of toxic assets while keeping current managers is not enough to save the financial system.
That weaning us from our addiction to foreign oil and fossil fuels will not pay off down the road.
That resuscitating a public education system that fails too many of our children is not worth the expense and effort.
That making diplomatic overtures to nations that the previous president bullied will not be a wiser course.
But until then, please back off.
Populist outrage is the flavor of the moment. But look closely at the polls and it is apparent that while this feeling of being terribly wronged is pervasive it is not — much to the dismay of “Just Say No” Republicans — particularly directed at a man who while showing an occasional propensity for having a tin ear has had the keys to the national car for barely two months.
Obama states that he is taking responsibility for the gaffes and missteps on his watch, as well as a whole lot of stuff that he has had the misfortune to inherit, and I believe him. He is treating us as adults and not political playthings in marked contrast to the last eight years, and that feels good amidst all the shock, pain, suffering and recriminations.
The president suggested at week’s end as he met with governors and mayors who are just beginning to receive the initial injection of stimulus money that we need to let off steam and then move on. That may seem like too pat a response, but it is the appropriate one. The AIG bonuses are a pimple on the elephant’s ass and the sooner that Congress and everyone else can get back to dealing with the elephant the better.
It is difficult to comprehend all of the balls that Obama has in the air and the consequences of dropping even one or two of them. But I am trying to remain hopeful while at the same time concede the national pooch may well have been screwed. That while the good old days may never have been as good as we thought, there will be no returning to the prosperity that many of us took for granted.
In fact, like a lot of us I too am scared.
Scared for my children’s future.
Scared for my friends of frail health and limited resources.
And scared for my pension fund.
I continue to believe that because of some extraordinary twists of fate, we have been gifted a president who was teaching constitutional law when the seeds of the crisis were first germinating. And that he is the best person to lead us out of the darkness, certainly more so than John McCain, Hillary Clinton or myriad other old-school pols would have been.
But to blame Obama for what has come before and judge him prematurely for what comes after is grotesque given our dire straits. So in the meantime, please back off. And pray that he — and we — succeed.
Shaun Mullen is a former The Moderate Voice columnist. Over a long career with newspapers, this award-winning editor and reporter covered the Vietnam War, O.J. Simpson trials, Clinton impeachment circus and coming of Osama bin Laden, among many other big stories. He blogs at Kiko’s House.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
109 Responses to “Memo To Obama Bashers: I’m Scared & Angry Too, But Please Back Off”
Define 'good'. I don't think WWII looks very good in terms of casualties and material costs. You're conflating a lot of different things here- the justness of a war with the necessity of it (was it potentially avoidable if other political steps had been taken?) and then the efficiency of the military action itself. Those are all apples to oranges to pears, and no war is actually 'good' in any sense of the word.
CS, IMO you do constantly make posts much further to the right than the persona you attempt to project would indicate you should. Look at your broad claim that liberals think all money belongs to the government in another thread. That is not a “center right” position, but something that is pure far right wing and generalization bordering on bigotry. It's not my fault that no one else bothers calling you on it when you do that and then try to claim that in reality you're center right. If you're going to make claims that could come straight from the RNC or the Limbaugh show (Whether you listen to him or not.) don't expect anyone being honest with you to treat you like some slightly right of center person.
As far as AR is concerned, remember this little jewel from his post.
The projection seems to be his, and the hatred, pettiness and vindictiveness his, CS.
BTW, let me clarify. I probably did over-react in my first post in this thread. But I have seen so many accusations towards people who support Obama that they are mostly supporting him because of some kind of cult of personality that I'm getting tired of hearing it, even if it is true for some of his supporters. There are some who make me think “Give me a break, already.” in their seeming hero worship of him. But it is equally true that there are those who try to paint virtually all of his supporters with that brush and that doesn't fly, either.
It's not my fault that no one else bothers calling you on it when you do that and then try to claim that in reality you're center right.
Well, maybe this is the point where you go astray in pegging me, Jim. I don't think I ever said I was center right and in fact I readily admit that my views are mostly quite conservative. What I do think I am is a person who is moderate in tone and attempts to have real policy discussions, not spouting talking points. You take issue if I say things that align with the RNC, but of course as a conservative there is going to be a lot of overlap between my views and the party in our country which supposedly represents a conservative platform.
What I try to do is engage in these debates in order to better understand people who hold opposing viewpoints, to try to challenge my own preconceptions, and to perhaps occasionally point out things which people who identify more with the left or center left might not be inclined to notice or see from their own perspective (IOW, to try to also encourage left leaners to challenge their own preconceptions.)
Look at your broad claim that liberals think all money belongs to the government in another thread. That is not a “center right” position, but something that is pure far right wing and generalization bordering on bigotry.
How so? When tax cuts are defined as expenses on the government spreadsheet, isn't that an assumption that the baseline of taxation that existed before the cut represented the government's fair share of which it is going to give back?
I'm not saying that liberals believe that ALL money belongs to the govt- but they do have a much different idea about the government's right to larger percentages of earnings than conservatives do. I was using that situation to try to point out to people who might not otherwise even realize that conservatives don't view deductions as a gift because it was their money to begin with. It's not more fair to allow a rebate of a smaller percentage of tax to the higher owner to equalize it to the percent paid by the lower wage earner because the wealthier person was paying more in tax to begin with.
But that IS what you said. It's almost precisely what you said. This is my problem with many of your postings. Say something and then deny that's what you wrote.
No, Jim, it's because you overinterpret my words. I said that there's a philosophical difference between liberals and conservatives on whose money it is- meaning the money that is tax revenue. Liberals believe that belongs to the govt by default- that doesn't mean that I'm saying that they believe that 100% of the income belongs to the govt- they believe that the percentage represented by the top bracket is the government's, and it only gives back the deductions as a gift to the taxpayer.
We disagree but that's not shocking. The “philosophy” is, in my view, simply that we need to have the funds to keep a government that has to deal with a large population living in a large area in complex times and a complex economic environment going. Given that our economic system is capitalism, money accrues to the top. Therefore that's where taxation to provide those funds has to take place, to a greater degree than those in the lower income brackets. There is, therefore, no philosophy as you are defining it, just a matter of simple pragmatism.
OK, Jim, but who gets to define how much funding is needed by that government? With the amount of corruption and incompetence in our political system that we have, I'm not willing to assign nearly as many functions to it as you are. And as far as that 'large population' and 'large area' that's exactly why I believe much more should be devolved back to the state level where greater oversight would be more possible by the people seeing what happens closer to home.
And I don't disagree with the principle of progressive taxation, just the degree of it. When people are already paying a much higher percentage (and now we're moving to the point where nearly 50% of earners will pay no federal income tax at all), then I can't agree with those who feel it's still not enough.