« Rush Limbaugh Moving to Cost Rica?
GOP Governor Candidates Stay The Course On Immigration Reform In California »
Obama on Offense
“Winning isn’t everything,” football coach Vince Lombardi famously said, “it’s the only thing.” Half a century later, as Republicans adapt that gridiron philosophy into a threat of political gridlock, Barack Obama is signaling it may not be a winning strategy.
As Congress left town this weekend, the President did an end run around their blocking of his executive choices by making 15 interim appointments.
“The United States Senate has the responsibility to approve or disprove of my nominees,” he said. “But if, in the interest of scoring political points, Republicans in the Senate refuse to exercise that responsibility, I must act…I simply cannot allow partisan politics to stand in the way of the basic functioning of government.”
If that sounds exaggerated, consider John McCain’s reaction to passage of health care, “There will be no cooperation for the rest of the year. They have poisoned the well in what they’ve done and how they’ve done it.”
As they take up the rallying cry of “repeal, replace and reform” of what House Leader John Boehner has called “Armageddon,” Republicans see themselves in a battle of Biblical proportions that calls not just for defeating enemies but obliterating them.
After a weeklong acting out of rage and resentment by a Tea Party minority across the country, what Richard Nixon used to call “the Silent Majority” of Americans may be ready to recoil and get behind a President who is going about the business of acting in their interests to strengthen the economy and deal with international threats such as nuclear weapons.
14 Responses to “Obama on Offense”
If Dems are looking to the silent majority to save them in November, they are in a lot of trouble.
It has been said here millions of times….
It is the economy stupid.
Economic and jobless numbers is what will save Dems from greater than usual midterm defeats.
Right now we're waiting to see if the Dems resume the Mad Rush — immigration “reform,” energy policy, labor law “reform” (sop to unions), and such.
Not only did this almost do them in by the time they got to health care “reform” recently, they also are in trouble for having bungled the earlier stimulus and scared people with misspending so much. (Fear of a debt trap constrains any new stimulus.)
We await their decision: go for a bunch more nonsense to placate the far Left, or go for the center, effectively (concentrating, indeed, on the economy and shoving the crazier stuff aside).
Lindsey Graham helped write the purposed immigration bill. It was thought that he would be the loan Rep to vote for reform. He seems wishy washy on it…his MTP interview seemed to show he was more interested in financial reform first, if anything at all, if he is allowed to work with Dems again.
Even if Obama goes all lefty until Nov, jobs and the economy will be what really swings voters….although it is worth debating whether not things going better will lead to voter complacency.
“jobs and the economy will be what really swings voters”
I believe so. Second to that is the plain fact that the GOP is unattractive and has yet to show that they are an alternative to the Dems that make it worthwhile to vote GOP to express dissatisfaction with the Dems. Maybe I'm over-emphasizing that, but I believe this is preventing another 1994.
But maybe Obama will sign a free trade treaty.
Who would you rather vote for? Someone who delivers unemployment benefits and laws that help the people affected by this recession or someone who doesn't care about the welfare of their constituents?
Colombia? If not, free trade with whom? Before or after “card check”? [grin]
Card check is a non-starter. I'd be surprised if there was much of a push for comprehensive immigration reform. And on energy I'd be surprised to get even a much scaled back bill from the Senate.
The next big issue is financial regulatory reform.
But always there is the overall economy and Congress's limited ability to affect it.
A minor point that might have slipped under the radar. One of the appointments he made was a Democratic member of the National Labor Relations Board which was deadlocked 1-1 before. If he only appointed the Democrat the two will be able to clear years of backlog in favor of the unions. I wonder if the Republicans would be so in love with gridlock if it is used against the balancing Republican on the board.
““the Silent Majority” of Americans MAY be ready to recoil and get behind a President who is going about the business of acting in their interests”
And monkeys MAY fly out of my butt – but I'm not counting on that either.
Jefferson Davis,
I don't know—I understand monkeys flying out of your butt is a very likely proposition.
Nice post Robert; I enjoyed the football metaphors – even though it's off season.
And yes, Krugman has it right:
I watch daily what flies out of you butt JD right here on this blog.
The risk Obama and the Congre-Dems are facing is that the public (the mainstream, at least, all but the far-left fringe) will recoil again and reject again a President and members of Congress that do other than what the public (mainstream) wants. This is what happened the previous year. Have they learned?