The Hidden Issue of 2010 (Guest Voice)
Feb 4th, 2010 | 13 responses
WASHINGTON — Vice President Joe Biden is tired of seeing the Obama administration’s economic stimulus plan demeaned, derided and dismissed, and he wanted to talk about it.
But a funny thing happened in the course of an interview at Biden’s White House office on Tuesday afternoon. The vice president’s passions poured forth not when he was offering his point-by-point defense of the economic recovery plan but on the question of whether the United States is in decline.
Late in the conversation, I asked Biden about the surprise applause line in President Obama’s State of the Union speech — “I do not accept second place for the United States of America.” Will we hear more on the America-as-No.-1 theme?
What followed was a torrent, in red, white and blue.
“From me you’re going to hear more,” he replied emphatically. “I want to tell you something, because if we cede the ground to those who suggest that — I don’t mean foreigners, I mean domestic critics — that somehow, we are destined to fulfill (historian Paul) Kennedy’s prophecy that we are going to be a great nation that has failed because we lost control of our economy and overextended, then we might as well throw it in now, for God’s sake. I mean it’s (BEG ITAL)ridiculous(END ITAL).”
On he went. “Give me a break. So many people have bet on our demise that it absolutely drives me crazy. … There’s sort of an attitude that is both politically directed by our Republican friends but also believed by a fair number of people that we just can’t make this transition in the 21st century.
“We will continue to be the most significant and dominant influence in the world as long as our economy is strong, growing and responsive to 21st-century needs. And they relate to education, they relate to energy and they relate to health care.”
Biden, more self-aware than people give him credit for, realized what he had just done. “I’ve sort of gotten off the Recovery Act,” he said with a rueful smile.
Yet by the end of the interview, I realized he had bumped into the hidden political issue of the 2010 elections. Beneath the predictable back-and-forth between Obama and his Republican adversaries over government spending lies a substantively important difference over how the United States can maintain its global leadership.
For Republicans, American power is rooted largely in military might and showing a tough and resolute face to the world. They would rely on tax cuts as the one and only spur to economic growth.
Obama, Biden and the Democrats, on the other hand, believe that American power depends ultimately on the American economy, and that government has an essential role to play in fostering the next generation of growth.
Notice that when Obama spoke about keeping America in first place, he said not a word about the military. He referred instead to the efforts of our competitors in the (BEG ITAL)public(END ITAL) sphere of the economy, and of our past complacency.
“Washington has been telling us to wait for decades, even as the problems have grown worse,” Obama said. “Meanwhile, China is not waiting to revamp its economy. Germany is not waiting. India is not waiting. These nations — they’re not standing still. These nations aren’t playing for second place. They’re putting more emphasis on math and science. They’re rebuilding their infrastructure. They’re making serious investments in clean energy because they want those jobs.”
Suddenly, Obama’s approach is not about old-fashioned Democratic spending. It’s about patriotism, competing successfully, investing to maintain American economic leadership. John F. Kennedy provided a slogan for such an effort 50 years ago: “Let’s get America moving again.”
Obama’s handlers can be terribly tough on Biden for digressing from the narrow point they want him to make. So let the record show that he spent most of our interview ably defending how the stimulus money has been spent and what it’s accomplished.
Biden’s insistence on “pushing back” against unfounded criticisms of the program was clearly part of Obama’s post-Scott Brown offensive, and it’s bracing that the administration has finally seen the wisdom of an axiom from Napoleon that is a favorite of Karl Rove’s: “The whole art of war consists in a well-reasoned and extremely circumspect defensive, followed by rapid and audacious attack.”
Transforming a listless national argument about the stimulus and health care into a larger debate over how to maintain American pre-eminence is both audacious and useful. Off-message, Biden found the right message.
This column is copyrighted and licensed to run on TMV in full. (c) 2010, Washington Post Writers Group
13 Responses to “The Hidden Issue of 2010 (Guest Voice)”
It's just a damn shame, that to get anything past the senate, you need two thirds majority. I am certain that is NOT the representative democracy our forefathers envisioned.
If is laughable to hear the progressives in the Democratic Party talk about wanting to help the economy and compete in the world's economy. Aren't there the same people who promose unlimited immigraiton from third world countries. Aren't these the same people who have decide that math, science, and engineering are unimportant since blacks and Hispanics cannot do it are the same level as whites and Asians? Are these the same people who decide that lawyers should be in charge of everything and nitpick everyone else.? Are these the same people who have passed so many vague regulations that compliance is virtually impossible?
To hear any progressive talk about wanting the U.S. to be great is laughable. Progressives want a nanny state with most of the population being poor, uneducated, and totally dependent on the government.
Its just a shame that the democratic party can't even convince all their own members to vote with their progressive agenda without resorting to bribes. That should be a wake-up call that they have gone too far left when the only thing bipartisan about their major bills is the opposition to them. If they really want the votes (without bribing congressmen) they need to move further to the political center
As Instapundit pointed out, “like it or not”??
What does that really say about the Democrats in Congress attitudes, that even Obama sees that they think the private sector is the enemy?
Speaking of patriotism and how the different parties view that through a different lens, specifically the Biden/Obama/Kennedy angle: Interesting how progressives were painted as unpatriotic when they called out reactionaries about a bogus war – bit that is in keeping with their dogmatic approach to how love of country is defined. Yet it never dawns on those same people how beating the drum for failure of efforts to reclaim our economy is supremely unpatriotic. (“Let’s get America moving again.” – JFK) Hypocrisy sure ain't pretty is it. Some folks never learn… maybe they don't want to learn.
Obama/Biden are channeling the late Paul Tsongas, who said “You can’t be pro-jobs and anti-business at the same time. You cannot love employment and hate employers.” The question is do they believe it or is it more empty rhetoric.
Democrats hardly project the belief they are pro-business or pro-employers, it's generally the opposite. And the further left you go into the progressive blogs the more business and employers are portrayed as the enemy instead of part of the solution.
Obama's pro-business elements within his budget are weak and will have little effect. The proposed health care bills and carbon taxes would have just made things worse. This is one area Democrats have little credibility.
Credibility based on what standard? People on the other side of the aisle who are in denial about AGW? People who refuse to believe that healthcare reform IS fiscally responsible in the long run? Credibility is relative.
Well, the Dems should produce a better plan, then.
“the only thing bipartisan about their major bills is the opposition to them”
I wonder if Obama, Biden, and company will consider Moody's to be “unpatriotic” — or just use its authority as another rationalization for raising taxes while neglecting spending control.
I say healthcare reform CAN BE fiscally responsible in the long run, but not with the current bills in Congress.
This, however, is a great idea, IMHO: http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/02/03/health.c…
The money grafs (to me)
That list is growing exponentially as many of the original supporters are realizing they have been duped and lied to:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/6847227/Questio…
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environme…
http://www.informath.org/pubs/EnE07a.pdf
http://www.honolulumagazine.com/Honolulu-Magazi…
http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2010…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/…
http://live.psu.edu/story/44327
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1246661…
I say healthcare reform CAN BE fiscally responsible in the long run, but not with the current bills in Congress.
Bingo. There is no way the current bills can be spun as pro-business, and some proposals would have hurt. A good bill could certainly help employers, but nothing in the current bills cuts costs.
There are no skeptical AGW “skeptics”. The unhinged reaction to the CRU hack proves it. CO2 is an externality – to say otherwise is profound denial.