Reflecting more on the running disagreement between Richard and me about Obama's leadership, here's how I see it.
In the latter days of the Democratic primary race, it came down to Obama and Clinton. Her position was: I'm more experienced, and I know how to work the system. His position was: The system is broken; I want to change the system.
So we bought Obama's optimism and his inspiration and hope that he could change the system.
He hasn't been able to, because the system is indeed broken and has only one function: to maintain its broken self and keep the (lucrative) status quo.
Richard faults Obama for not being a leader and even wonders if he is incompetent. I fault the broken system (Congress' arcane rules for obstructing change; lobbyists buying the right to shape legislation) and wonder if it's possible ever to change it.
Richard and I both voted for Obama to be a transformational president. Now Richard wants him to be Hillary (or maybe LBJ) and knock heads and twist arms and make the system work.
I still want to believe that transforming the system is possible, but I'm fast losing hope and becoming dangerously discouraged. But I blame the Congress and the system, not Obama.
Do you really think that, choosing whether to obey Obama or the pharma/insurance companies that bought them, those recalcitrant Dems who bottled up and watered down the health care reform would give up the money in order to support the president?
Obviously, it's not a clean either/or decision that is apparent. They seem to be supporting reform and Obama; but things are just so complex and the voting margin so narrow, and so many deals have to be made to get that extra vote -- that, well, it may just not be able to happen the way you want, Mr. President.
I suspect Obama is fully aware of all this. He knows what he's up against, and he'd rather go down still trying to change the system than go down having tried to knock heads -- and still lose.
Richard assumes Obama could win if he would knock heads. I doubt it. In that sense, despite his criticism, Richard is still the idealist, believing that Obama could still do it . . . if he only would.
He's just switched his hopes from negotiating to head-knocking -- while I've become the cynic, saying: why bother, the system won't let it happen. The only hope is changing the system (see my blog from yesterday).
Ralph
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I may be less disdillusioned than either of you. It seems to me that everyone these days wants to go back - back to some place we think we used to be. Back to the fundamentals - Constitution, good old days, Reagan Era, Kennedy era, 50's, 60's. I think the craziness these days is not having a clue where we're headed. In post WWII Cold War days we knew - we had floated to the top, the enemy was clear, 'growth' was still our mantra. To me, we're in the era of "the great confusion." I can think of lots of things that I wish would change, that I wish Obama would/could do. But I'm not sure where we're going either. As much as I hate it, I think we're in for a time when we'll continue to fight about where the country is headed with no satisfying results - not until it becomes clear what the answer actually is. I'm thinking it has something to do with "downsizing" - coming to grips with the fact that "growth" isn't an enduring goal. And maybe that "power" isn't either. I think Obama is doing the best he can in the current maddening circumstances...
ReplyDeleteAs the Huff Post said today - GOP Blinks.
ReplyDeleteThat's the Obama I had hoped for when I worked for his election. The man who would stand up, yes knock heads when needed, and get things done.
When children(the GOP) throw tantrums, you can't keep giving them toys. Sometimes you have to put them in time out.
richard