September 20, 2010, Reality bites, part ___
Kudos to Scarecrow of FDL for this scathing screed (or is it a jeremiad?) tearing the President a new one concerning the White House's sudden realization that the Democratic Party is going to get creamed at the polls in a few weeks, as revealed in a Grey Lady piece, the White House let it be known that it is considering ads to tell the nation that the Republcans are craaaaaazeeee "tea party extremists" have "taken over the Republican Party." [Hey... Briston Palin and the Situation are on Dancing with the Stars? WTF? Where was I...]
Oh... to quote Scarecrow's screed (or is it a jeremiad?):
The Republican brand was virtually dead by 2008. To accomplish such a turnaround, after being handed a huge mandate to change the country’s fundamental direction, this Administration has approached every one of the nation’s staggering problems as though all that was needed was a modest redirection in focus, an adjustment in priorities, a few more billions here instead of there, better regulation by the same regulators who were asleep and disinclined to act the last time, but nothing that would fundamentally change the structure of how the country’s most powerful and damaging institutions operate. Faced with the need for boldness and courage, they worshipped timidity and preached first patience and then acceptance and docility among worried citizens.The President repeatedly told us that many of the solutions were "Republican ideas" and that responsible Republicans were acting in good faith. How many times do you recall this White House saying, "what this problem needs is a strongly progressive solution"? Or the dismantling of powerful interests? Any yet if you look at the measures the White House and apologists now point to as "achievements," they were more often deeply popular holdover progressive ideas that Congress passed in the momentum following the elections. They did not pass as a result of the White House overcoming massive opposition.
While taking credit for what he did not achieve with much effort, the President and his men have repeatedly denigrated and belittled progressives and ignored their ideas. The measure of this is how unusual it is to have Liz Warren gain a position in the Administration over the objections of Obama’s closest advisers.
Now the White House strategy is to blame progressives and voters themselves for their lack of enthusiasm for a regime that has left 15 million unemployed, permitted record levels of poverty and decimated state public programs, threatens social security and teeters on the edge of a second recession with no credible plans for near-term relief. Fittingly, his new chief economic adviser doubles as a stand up comic.
And they still don’t get it. The Times article tells us this White House is having trouble focusing on a plausible political strategy for the midterm elections only weeks away, because they’re preoccupied with Rahm Emanuel’s expected run for mayor of Chicago. Are they serious?
The Chief Of Staff is the Obama White House’s senior political adviser, but the Times hints he and his aides are worrying about what’s best for him and not his country, Party or President? There’s a solution for that one.
Well, that's just it, isn't it? It's about personal careerism-- Barack's, Rahm's, Geithner's... whomever's. It's never about good (or even smart) policy... it's political calculations to be sure, but entirely in the personal corporate interest to maximize that eventual book/speaking/hedge fund package. I just can't get myself to worry too much about the mid-terms: while there are a few Dems (Nancy Pelosi comes to mind) who give a darn, by and large, one set of corporate ho's is as good as another.
And as I keep telling you: the Obama Administration believes it's best chance in 2012 is to lose Congress now. (Meanwhile, the GOP is partying like it's 1994 with their new Contract on for America... what a bunch of maroons! Thing is... they want to lose Congress every bit as much as Obama wants them to win it!) As predicted: it's the "He's a Kenyan-born/socialist/Muslim who hates America and doesn't support our troops" crowd vs. the "they're craaaaaaaaaazy" crowd.
You'd think, given that (as I keep telling you), neither party is going to change the arc our country is presently on (that would be "straight to hell") even a little, you'd think we could at least get some entertainment value about all this. But it looks like the election is going to be as bland and uninspiring as... the President himself, come to think of it.
This has been... "Reality bites, part ___."