Mounting Malaise?
I’ve been neither an Obama-basher nor an Obama-gusher. Since he is President of the United States, we all have a tremendous stake in the success of his policies and initiatives. But I don’t seem to be alone in experiencing concerns.
Today’s New York Times editorializes on Mr. Obama’s China trip. And, though it cautions against “premature” complaints, the thrust of the piece seems to comprise a litany of laments. For example:
But publicly, Mr. Obama pulled his punches on China’s exchange rate, saying only that Beijing had promised previously to move toward a more market-oriented rate over time. Despite its indebtedness, the United States has the world’s largest economy; Mr. Obama should have nudged Beijing to move faster. We hope he did so privately.
We were especially disappointed that China made no discernible move to join with the United States and other major powers in threatening tougher sanctions if Iran fails to make progress on curbing its nuclear weapons program. President Obama should have made clear in his private talks that the United States and Europe will act anyway if Beijing and Moscow block United Nations Security Council action.
It was also dispiriting that Mr. Obama agreed to allow China to limit his public appearances so markedly. Questions were not permitted at the so-called press conference with Mr. Hu, and his town hall meeting with future Chinese leaders in Shanghai not only had a Potemkin air, it was not even broadcast live in China. It’s obvious that the last thing Mr. Hu wanted was to get questions about issues like his brutal repression in Tibet and Xinjiang. That doesn’t explain Mr. Obama’s acquiescence in such restrictions.
Dana Milbank, in Thursday’s Washington Post, was more blunt:
Listening to President Obama and his Chinese counterpart this week, it was hard to tell who was Hu. One is the leader of a great democracy. The other is the head of a repressive regime. But as the two men faced reporters in Beijing’s Great Hall of the People, Obama deferred to the wishes of President Hu Jintao: They would not take questions. In lieu of this rite of freedom, the two leaders exchanged platitudes.
Finally, the father of a passenger on one of the flights of 9/11 had this to say in today’s Wall Street Journal, regarding the recent appearance of the Attorney General before the Senate Judiciary Committee:
Mr. Holder said that he and his boss had not spoken in person about this decision. This matter only involves upholding the constitutional rights of Americans, establishing a precedent with battlefield impact, and the safety and security of our citizens in a time of war. What are the criteria to make something a priority with President Barack Obama? How can it be that this matter didn’t make the cut?
At the risk of sounding like Jimmy Carter, do the polls manifest a mounting malaise?
I think polls are pretty steady, actually — but the op-ed page of the WSJ is not a great place to assess public opinion. It’s simply not true, and not remotely believable, that Holder, in appearing before the judiciary committee, seemed not to have considered “the possible unintended consequences that will arise from his historic decision.” Likewise, suggesting that making decisions about the fate of the enemy combatants at Guantanamo is not a “priority” for president Obama is a silly smear.
Indeed, in his campaign he promised to close Guantanamo, and one of his first statements when he took office was that he would close it within a year. There are still a couple of months left…
I like the analogy of three planes still in the air. Heath care, Afghanistan, economy… They will all land very soon so it’s too early to count failure/casualties and indulge in ‘malaise’ …That’s Fox news hoping for bad Administration news..
Well, my concern from last summer (meaning 2008) was that either Dem nominee was too conservative to buck Big Bidness. If you want to know when I lined up for “malaise,” as it were, it was when Geithner was named for Treasury.
Thanks to the Almighty Two Party System, we have a totally incompetent last-place party strutting as if it were in second place. Which, gosh, so it is.
So you’ll pardon me if I don’t take the corporate cheerleaders at WSJ very seriously, nor the major party landscape of American politics. It’s hard to get past the nearly unclothed notion that Big Bidness is holding this whole lot of politicians at bay with the threat of national collapse. As far as I’m concerned, bring the troops home, reform the health insurers and end the Wild West lawlessness among corporations (In other words make them as accountable as any of us would be if we stole billions of dollars). Anyone against that is too conservative for my taste, and if that means the Dem Party as a whole, so be it.
Obama promised quite a few things as Candidate Obama, not the least of which was to urge Congress to repeal the DOMA and Don’t Ask; Don’t Tell. I’m still waiting. Guantanamo is not the only think on which he has waffled.
I know that he has much bigger things on his plate (economy, healthcare, Vietn – oops, Afghanistan) but I would also like to believe that this President can get his staff to walk AND chew gum at the same time. He also could simply issue executive orders to no enforce these laws until further actions can be taken.
By their fruits so shall you know them.
Re: above
Think? thing? Maybe both —
I too was somewhat disappointed at the results of the China trip. Perhaps there was wondeful stuff happening behind the scenes, such as a convergence of sorts on Iran and other such thorny problems. China has made it very clear in the last few years that it is sck and tired of being lectured to by the west (and the US in particular), on questions ranging from human rights to the management of the economy; indeed on this last, they have been lecturing us, and with some reason, since they have a huge stake in this country, and are already suffering from a plummeting dollar.
It seems pretty clear that Hu, Wen, & Co. were in control of the Obama visit, but I do think that he and his cohort might have insisted on a bit more openness. At least he might have refused to play a game of make-believe in that so-called town hall meeting in Shanghai, where the “audience” (if that’s the word) was packed with thoroughly dependable student cadres all of whom could be trusted to ask thoroughly orthodox questions and give thoroughly orthodox answers.
Perhaps Obama should have gone to the Shanghai site where American Asiatic Underwriters was founded in 1919, long before it moved to New York ( in1949) and morphed into AIG; then he could have laid a wreath on its grave, or driven a stake through its heart, or whatever else one does with the living dead.
And then there’s this: http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/11/manufactured_failure_2_the_pre.php
Grant,
Somewhere along the spectrum between Tish Durkin’s “Obama came, he charmed, he left” and Fox News’ “venit, vidit, victus est” lies that golden mean ever dear to dotCommers.
Grant – thanks for sending that Fallows article, which I had not seen. However, I would find it more convincing if he (or Amb. Huntsman or some of the others) were to be a bit more specific on the accomplishments of Obama’s visit to the People’s Republic. The China Beat
http://www.thechinabeat.org/?p=1170
an interesting blog from China experts (an oxymoron, that term, says Amb. Huntsman) offers a pretty balanced view.
Mr. Clifford,
thank you for an interesting link. I followed up one of the other links she gave, and it too was helpful. No time to chase them all down, however.
Are you and I the only ones up for Matins :-)? Happy feast of Christ the King.
I think President Obama tends to delegate too much, and this puts him in the position of not seeming to actually be engaged. I also think he is not sure of himself.
Regarding the economy, he should tend more toward fiscal restraints and being responsible. He would in my opinion, do better by getting the government out of the way and letting the economy recover as it naturally tends to; bureaucratic meddling only gums up the works and slows recovery.
As for social initiatives, I think he should be more engaged and that he should show more leadership. He should focus on healthcare reform, and leave other matters for later. Rather than relying on the usually short-sighted legislators, the President should have developed his own health care reform legislation and guided it through Congress. I think he knows that now.
Regarding defense and foreign policy, I think he has problems. He is correct to tone down our “policeman of the world” rhetoric but in doing so, he sometimes appears weak or even apologetic.
Iraq is thankfully winding down but as for Afghanistan, President Obama has yet to develop or enforce any real policy. He seems to just follow along with the old Bush plan, all the while complaining about it. In my opinion he should simply pull the troops out and call it good. As for changing Afghan hearts and minds, it is just not worth the effort. Even if all the Afghans get the vote, the place would only be a democratic Opium State run by Muslim mafiosos – that’s great. No, that place is not worth one more American boy. It is better to cut our losses and turn our attention towards things national. Whether we close Guantanamo Bay or not is irrelevant.
All this having been said, President Obama is only finishing his first year; he has time to correct. He has many positive attributes, and he and his family bring a certain charm and levity to the white house that I find refreshing. If he tends to his knitting and does not get sidetracked, and if he lives up to his heritage and makes both Black and White Americans proud, he will do just fine.
I should add that I am Republican and voted for McCain.
Without getting into the substance of his policies – everyone knows how I feel about those – I think he is just showing himself to be a poor leader, and the polls are reflecting that. I will add, however, that I don’t think polls are necessarily a good measure of whether someone is a good leader. I just think right now that’s what people are objecting to – they are uncomfiortable with him.
Years ago in a conversation with a friend and fellow officer about a common acquaintance and more senior officer about whom we both had a low opinion, I said I couldn’t quite put my finger on what bothered me about him since he was clearly capable and intelligent. My friend, who knew him better, said, “Lt Col X is smart but he combines all the worst characteristics of a leader, he is arrogant, indecisive, and obtuse.”
The issue oh the KSM trial is a great example. When he said, “It wasn’t my call,” the independence of the AG aside, that struck me as insane. He was either lying or he is completely obtuse. The implications of the decision for national security and historic precedence were so huge that not taking accountability for it is the height of irresponsibility for a man in his position.
Sean – The very lame “It wasn’t my call” regarding KSM goes directly to one my observations. This is not a ball game and Mr. Obama is not a referee. He is President of one of the most powerful nations on earth. Of course he has something to say about this matter.
One may or may not agree with trying KSM in civilian court (I happen to favor handling this in Cuba, in military fashion), but if the administration makes a decision like that, why would the President not claim onership and defend the decision?
President Obama should have come out and flatly stated that for whatever reason, he thinks this is the best way – period. In any case he is President; why not own the decision?
That he is hiding behind someone’s skirt regarding this is very unbecoming of him or any man; very lame and worryingly bureaucratic. He should be more confident and willing to stand up for what he thinks.
I do not expect to agree with any President all the time, but I admire a man who is straightforward and not afraid to say what he thinks.
If Obama’s job is to ‘call’ where the trials are held, he must be the super president many of us all hoped for…If so then .. shouldn’t we be giving him credit that no hurricanes hit the USA this year?? Next year he may bring the Cubs to the World Serious..Boy, that’ll show em..