With every passing day, Barack Obama is ensuring his own reelection -- but at a bloodcurdling cost for Democrats on the ballot without him in 2010.
President Obama is gifted with that alchemical political material, Teflon. He speaks with power and grace. He exudes even-handed comfort, assuring all sides that this president understands their argument. His smile is an embrace that disarms, displaying the confidence of a young leader certain his intellect will prevail.
In policy, the Democrats may have regressed to old, industrial-age collectivism, prescribing the same federal pill for every ill. In personnel, with this charismatic president, they are enjoying a generational leap forward. Bill Clinton's old-school charm made his every performance the topic of late night talk shows. This president's self-awareness, his post-modern reflexivity, breaks down the barriers between audience and narrator. He steps down easily from the leader's pedestal to shoot hoops, enjoy a date night with his wife, and walk comfortably among everyday Americans. America loves this guy. America is this guy. President Obama, ever-present on TV, has become the host of our national group-therapy sessions. So who needs Letterman or Leno?
More importantly, Obama is protected by our aspirations. He represents the America we all want to be, a better country, beyond racial divisions and tension. For this reason alone, we will likely hold him high in our esteem after our respect for his accomplishment dims.
Already, however, we are seeing a large discrepancy between who he is and what he does, a gulf that will mark his presidency. Other presidents have been as popular at similar points in their service, but this president's buoyant ratings defy the cumbersome policies he carries. Barack Obama replenishes the soul but empties the wallet. Cheering for this president is expensive.
When President Obama saw a credit crisis, Americans saw him spending. When Obama saw an economy in need of stimulus, Americans saw him spending. When Obama saw a housing bust, bankrupt auto companies, Wall-Street failures, Americans saw him spending, spending and spending. Now, when the Democrats and our president see the need to spend less on health care, Americans, with some bewilderment, see them spending more on health care. Obama has taken on so many unrelated challenges that America can only see their common denominator: Obama is always spending.
The Obama spending spree has begun to ring political alarms. Confidence in President Obama's ability to deal with the country's most important issue, the economy, is eroding. This is not good news for budget director Peter Orszag and his team of aptly nicknamed "propeller-heads" who keep telling the president that he has to spend more money to save it.
Surveys released last week by Pew, NBC News/Wall Street Journal and the New York Times/CBS News, show a net 15 point swing in the president's handling of the economy. Nearly 60 percent in the NBC poll see controlling the president's growing deficit as a higher priority than speeding up economic recovery. Now more bad news: A June 22 Resurgent Republic survey reveals that 62% of Independent voters, critical to Obama's success, believe "reforming health care is important, but it should be done without raising taxes or increasing the deficit." Americans see Washington on fire with Democratic spending and their President pouring kerosene, not water, on the flames.
Obama won't be on the ballot in 2010, but his spending will be. What are voters to do when they see a Democratic House, Senate, and president spending recklessly, without check or balance, pressing the accelerator to ever-increasing speed, without anyone or anything to stop them? It is likely they will send our President a message: For god's sake, Mr. President, slow down. Have a cigarette.
Democrats running for their lives in swing districts will soon find it in their interest to join a growing populist revolt against what Kevin Philips once termed the big-spending "mandarins of Establishment liberalism." Centrist Democrats who reflect their middle-of-the-road districts will find themselves the most vulnerable. They'll see they must either slow their drive to splurge or they will be replaced by cars which actually have brake pedals. Even so, 2010 could bring Democrats a bloodbath. Bill Clinton, with an approval rating below 50%, saw his party lose 52 seats and both houses of Congress two years after he was elected. Barack Obama, with approval of his handling of the economy now dipping near the same 50% mark, could see a comparable loss. Republican gains in the House could nearly double the usual 23-seat gain by the party out of favor.
Moderate Democrats, fearing this precipice, won't wait for election day 2010 to climb to higher ground though first, their lemming-like instincts will induce them to spend another trillion dollars on health care. Shortly after they burn through this cash, we can expect the White House and imperiled Democrats to sharply reverse field and start bill-boarding the President's old promise to halve the deficit before his first term ends. When the liquor cabinet is empty, the party in power will pledge sobriety. It will be too late. After having tagged on at least $4.85 trillion in deficits in four years, the Democrats will have de-branded themselves as the party of economic responsibility and rebranded themselves as the party that cannot be trusted with the nation's checkbook, the party for whom electoral success was an aberration named Jimmy Carter.
Democratic candidates will become cannon fodder, their expensive, utopian frustrations unleashed by their uninhibited Congressional majorities. In the aftermath, the tenuous alliance between left-leaning Obama Democrats and centrist New Democrats will rupture, leaving Hillary Clinton to emerge as leader of the fiscally responsible. Out on the campaign trail and in the media, Democrats will have the enthusiastic support of the last Democratic President to balance the budget and produce a surplus. Yahoo, Bill Clinton rides to the rescue. Can politics get more entertaining than that? This will be Hillary's revenge. And it will be George W. Bush's revenge, as well.
President Obama, who has continually lectured Republicans about the economic irresponsibility he has inherited, will be humbled by his own fiscal indulgence. If only President Obama faced a little more Republican opposition to shield him from his excesses. In that sense, it turns out Tuesday, November 2, 2010 will be Barack Obama's lucky day.
As President Obama watches the carnage of 2010, he will realize the repudiation of his spending, before he is on the ballot himself, is a disguised blessing. Post-November, the president will contritely acknowledge he has received the message. He'll say, "I promise you -- I get it," eliminating the need for voters to take him to the woodshed. In his January 2011 State of the Union, President Barack Obama will stand before Congress, wait for the audience to quiet -- and he will declare that the Era of Big Government is over. Again.
Fewer middle-of-the-road Democrats will be there to applaud him. Barack Obama will smile anyway and cruise confidently to reelection in 2012.
1) Who are the vulnerable Democratic House & Senate members?
2) Who are the Republican candidates likely to defeat them?
The reason we never see the facts from those dishing the 'Remember the Alamo' meme is not only because the facts don't support the fallacious claim, but because the dearth of Republican candidates underlies the bankruptcy of the Republican pseudo philosophy.
The posited cause this week for a return to 1994 is deficit spending. The Republican solution to any and every fiscal problem is tax cuts. Even the most forgetful swing voter in Republican leaning districts can't forget how poorly Republicans managed the budget when it was theirs to manage.
Castellanos and the Republican noise machine are whistling past the grave yard.
WHATEVER MAN !
TonyP4
It's total hogwash!
Mr.Castellanos is correct on several points, Republican pundits ARE worried about Obama's spending, and are spinning up their fear mongering to match, but he fails to grasp the need for that spending (Bush spent very little on America in 8 years), or the long term goals of that spending!
Mr. Castellanos also fails to note that $5 trillion of our $10 trillion deficit was generated between 2000 and 2008.......Mr. Castellanos also failed to express his concern for that spending during those years.
"When President Obama saw a credit crisis, Americans saw him spending"
Huh? This has become part of the republican delusion syndrome afflicting your party. The credit crunch and the bailout happened under Bush, yet this nonsense gets repeated. Do you think if you say it often enough, its true?
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.â€
Sounds like the Bush/Cheney administration doesn't it?
J
This article, sadly, lived up to my expectation. You spend so much time talking about how democrats will pay for its spending. All spending is bad, other than tax cuts of course. Its this sort of simple-minded thought that has your party sinking into moth-eaten chapters of history.
Spending is important. The reason Americans don't like tax spending is because its rare that we see where our money is going. We don't have national health care, or beautiful subway systems, or great roads. WE just have shadowy corporate subsidies and secret military spending. IF Americans saw where their tax money goes, they would better appreciate what they are contributing to. This is why spending on stimilus, healthcare, th environment, public transit, nd the meany social policies Obama is advocating will dramatically change how we view taxes and the social appartus from which our nation draws pride.
I think this scares republicans. Every social program (medicare, social security) that benefits the middle class, you guys can't touch, cant underfund, because the people want nd benefit.
This is the neglected point in discussions of government spending. It is also the most important point.
So focused on 2010 and ignoring what's happening today. Desperate attempts are pitiful.
Sure, let's forget that there is still 2 W A R S happening today and pretend that H al ibur ton didn't steal billions in taxpayer money that should have gone into health care for Americans.
And we're listening to this Republican media consultant / strategist ... Because ?
A Fairy Tale for Republicans Lost in the Wilderness.