Obama the “Winner”!
P. Schultz
October 18, 2013
Here
is a quote from today’s NY Times, in a piece analyzing the results of the
latest “crisis” – anyone know what happened to the “crisis” in Syria? – or at
least pretending to.
“By nearly all accounts, Mr. Obama
emerged the winner of the showdown, having stared down attempts to undercut his
health care program or force other concessions, but it is not clear what he
actually won. Did he change the dynamic of his tumultuous presidency and break
the cycle of Washington gridlock, opening the way to more meaningful
legislation in months to come? Or did he merely kick the can down the road
three months so he and Congress will be in the same place again, repeating a
pattern that will define his remaining three years in office?” From the NY Times, today, October 18, 2013.
There
is one assumption, among many possible ones, that I like to make when it comes
to analyzing the actions of our politicians and that is: I assume that most
often they get what they want to get, they get pretty much what they intended
to get. So, if Obama did not “change the dynamic of his tumultuous presidency
and break the cycle of Washington gridlock,” then that is because he did not
want to do that. Why would he not want to do that? Well, because he is
essentially a status quo politician and president, whose main agenda is to
preserve the prevailing alignment of forces in the D.C., those very same forces
that the American people despise. Once one entertains this notion for even a
little while, it becomes clear that Obama, like Boehner, would not want to
“win” much as a result of the latest “crisis.” Nor would he or Boehner want to
use that “crisis” and the resulting popular anger to do anything really
significant by way of changing the prevailing dynamic of our politics. Obama
has shown himself to be a status quo president over and over and over again,
making me wonder why the Times’ analyst calls his presidency “tumultuous.”
Perhaps it is merely part of an attempt, quite common in the mainstream press,
to perpetuate the myth that Obama is an “activist” president, is concerned with
the common good, or is concerned with the health of our political and social
order. If one measures Obama by his actions, then it is quite delusional to
think of him in these terms – just as it quite delusional to think of Boehner
in similar terms. But any way, here the link to the article.
No comments:
Post a Comment