President Obama is looking worse and worse. The combination of a terrible economy and a terrible foreign policy outlook ought to sink him, provided the Republicans can find a competent candidate. Obama never would have been elected in the first place if only John McCain had still been alive.
Regarding the economy, I just posted another ten reasons why the recession will last forever over at my “Inner Workings” blog at Asia Times Online.
Obama’s performance at the UN was really miserable. He is almost too narcissistic to function. A President has a cabinet in part to shield the office of the Presidency from major failures. The President’s ultimate response to a catastrophe in some area of policy should be, “I fired that guy.” Obama, however, has no cabinet—only policy czars and special ambassadors who report directly to him. Hillary Clinton’s job appears to involve women’s rights in Africa, or something; James Jones (quick—remember what he does?) doesn’t appear to have any job at all. Obama is everywhere, doing everything, asking for credit and getting the blame.
Afghanistan is looking worse, for the obvious reason that Ambassador Richard Holbrooke’s self-promoting attempt to pacify Pakistan has pushed all the pressure out the proverbial back door—into Pakistani support for the Taliban. Defense Secretary Robert Gates should have been there to take the bullets for the president, but Obama cannot resist the spotlight.
In the end, Obama’s own strongest qualities—his remarkable persuasiveness and media appeal—may be his undoing. Never has a president left himself so exposed with so little room to fall back.
September 24th, 2009 | 4:54 pm
David you summed up B.O. many months before the election and have turned out to be right on all counts. I hope you’re right about the one term only.
September 24th, 2009 | 6:29 pm
In Indiana Companies are hiring, giving bonuses and raises for the first time in 3 years. We are pulling out of Iran. Remember who put us in Afghanistan and left BO to clean it up. Health Care is a done deal, Including public option.
Sorry neos but wishing don’t make it so.
September 24th, 2009 | 6:40 pm
One can only hope for a one-term wonder.
September 24th, 2009 | 7:04 pm
So the fact that the guy can take responsibility for failures and mistakes is a bad thing?
While I don’t sympathize with all of his policy preferences, at least he hasn’t invaded a country in a volatile region under false pretenses yet. Call me back when that happens, and I’ll reassess.
September 24th, 2009 | 8:04 pm
Mr. Sureck, Either you are mistaken or you are engaging in some wishful thinking of your own. Statistics put out by the Indiana Dept of Workforce Development reveals the following:
Total nonfarm employment, Indiana:
Jan ‘07 – 2,981,800
Jan ‘08 – 2,985,100
Jan ‘09 – 2,880,100
June ‘09 – 2,810,700
Aug ‘09 – 2,792,500
Prior to Jan ‘07, employment had remained fairly steady for many years.
September 24th, 2009 | 8:45 pm
The economy will remain down until all of the market distortions wrought by the 12 bubble self-correct. When the self-correction is complete, I see no reason why we cannot continue to have 80’s rates of economic growth. The recession will not last “forever”, unless you define “forever” as being the extended period of time that the economy is not allowed to self-correct.
September 24th, 2009 | 10:18 pm
the big question is if Obama is to be a one termer, somebody has to beat him in an election, who is that going to be?
September 25th, 2009 | 10:16 am
I can improve on the one-term scenario–Republican majorities in both houses of Congress beginning Jan 2011, and a less-than-one-term Obama via impeachment and conviction.
OK, not a likely scenario, but since we’re hoping…
Mr. Sureck: wrong on Indiana employment, as previously noted, and wrong on foreign policy–we’re not pulling out of Iran, since we’re not there–yet.
September 25th, 2009 | 10:28 am
“He is almost too narcissistic to function.”
And your smug certainty is what? humility? And when Sarah Palin replaces Obama in 2013, things will be better for exactly what reasons? Because she has no narcissistic traits, right? and her handling of complex economic difficulties inherited from (presumably) Obama’s wrecking of the perfection under George W. Bush will consist of what brilliant solutions? and her foreign policy expertise will fix everything about our entanglements in the middle east how?
Having a neocon call you narcissistic is a little like having a frog call you ugly.
September 25th, 2009 | 12:18 pm
Steve:
When, exactly, has Obama “take[n] responsibility for failures and mistakes”? While he is ever-eager to apologize for America’s past misdeeds, when has he admitted that he was mistaken in any of his policies or positions? What other response has he given to criticism of his policies or positions than either a) “Bush screwed things up worse than we thought”, or b) “Those opposed to me are dishonest or unhinged or both”?
Telemann:
In responding to a criticism of Obama, instead of addressing the author’s main point of evidence of the weakness of their hero – that he has no cabinet to support, advise, and provide cover for him – why do you think that resorting to bashing Bush (whom the author did not defend) and Palin (who is not in office and unlikely to head the Republican ticket in 2012) is somehow an effective reply? Is “Yeah, well, Bush sucked and Palin would suck too!” really the defense of Obama’s performance that you want to go with?
September 25th, 2009 | 12:49 pm
Joe Devet, your hope for impeachment and conviction is choice. Obama is guilty of what crime exactly? Putting your policy preferences on the ropes, I suppose. Off with his head!
Whatever happened to neocon worries about criminalizing politics? Where is Jody Bottum when you need him?! And where are all those diagnosticians of presidential derangement syndrome? We obviously need them too.
September 25th, 2009 | 1:35 pm
[...] Thoughts: A One-Term Wonder? by David P. [...]
September 25th, 2009 | 1:56 pm
Seems to me the economy has plenty of time to heal enough for The One to seriously contend for another 4 years. As to a GOP takeover of congress, those are are still long odds. Simply look up the retirement numbers for the GOP and you’ll have a better understanding. Still, I do think if this guys loses in 3 years it’ll be his own ego that does him in. Reagan’s greatest strength was finding people he trusted and then letting them do their jobs. This guy, nobody appears smart enough to please him. And certainly We The People aren’t smart enough to know what’s good for us.
September 25th, 2009 | 7:05 pm
My very early choice for the 2012 Republican candidate – former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson.
September 25th, 2009 | 11:47 pm
Impeachment? High crimes and misdemeanors? Oh yes, there have been a few already. How about this quick list (and others could probably fill in several others)?
* Firing the CEO of GM. Since when does a US president have the authority to do such a thing? It was a usurpation of power, and an unconstitutional act.
* As was jiggering the laws of bankruptcy, moving certain unsecured interests ahead of secured creditors, and then slandering those creditors by calling them greedy and worse. The constitution does not give the president power to change a law without legislative action.
* This week’s gag order, ordering health insurance companies not to present their case against Obamacare, and bullying them into silence with threats of legal action. A high crime against the First Amendment of the constitution.
* Lying to the American people about provisions in the health care bills. Before you argue that Obama was voted in specifically to lie to us as our president, recall that Richard Nixon was threatened with impeachment basically because he lied to us about Watergate.
* Illegally funneling hundreds of millions to ACORN for their nefarious activities. OK, I’m making an assumption. Wanna wager on it?
This is just a start. Goodness, he’s only been emperor, I mean messiah, for a few months. Wait till he really hits his stride. There’ll be plenty to impeach on by 2011.
September 26th, 2009 | 7:38 pm
GeronimoRumplestiltskin:
I actually wouldn’t have made that assertion myself, but it was strongly implied by the original post, then denounced as if it would be a vice:
“A President has a cabinet in part to shield the office of the Presidency from major failures. The President’s ultimate response to a catastrophe in some area of policy should be, ‘I fired that guy’. … Obama is everywhere, doing everything, asking for credit and getting the blame.”
While Obama hasn’t, as far as I can remember, verbally taken responsibility for a notable failure, Mr. Goldman made a claim that Obama’s actions have resulting in exactly this. I see such ‘getting the blame’ as virtuous (if, that is, Mr. Goldman’s assertion is correct).
September 27th, 2009 | 4:45 pm
I’ve already resigned myself to the inevitable: No matter what President Obama does or does not do over the next three years, any problems he encounters or causes will be President Bush’s fault. Not only will this be the Dem’s defense, it will be the party line of the MSM. (Somewhat redundant there, I know.)
However, there are already signs that the general public is seeing through this defense (because they’re all racists, perhaps?). Let’s hope this clear-sightedness continues through the media barrage on the horizon.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact