|
||
A Line in the Sand Is Occasionally Useful
Both positions -- that Israel's sovereignty is absolute, and the U.S. must never appear to press Israel very hard, so that Israel might even be allowed to bomb Iran if it made the strongest case; and that the public option may just have to be dropped, and is indeed ultimately expendable, provided it can be held in reserve in the way spelled out by Emanuel -- both views (one must suppose) were "entertained" by the president in a manner so lacking in definition that his vice president and his chief of staff took him to have budged. Both believed they were authorized to convey a subtle change of stance. Then embarrassment struck on both fronts, and Obama backed off his backing off.
It has been said by many observers that Barack Obama is the only leader at present in the world who has some of the qualities of a world leader. And if urbanity, grace, and the ability to take long views are what we have in mind, it is clear why so many cherish the hope that this lofty estimate will turn out to be true. But principle is a different matter from style. Commitment is measured not by large intentions, but by specific tenacity; and this means at points a refusal of pliability whose meaning is impossible to mistake. Yet, on this question of political character, the evidence on Obama is mixed and its core oddly elusive. Can he be a world leader without being a leader of his cabinet or his country?
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Gee, sorry folks, but what I'm reading on this thread is a lot of heavy breathing from pseudo-intellectuals. Honestly, get over yourselves. You want to point to links that say what you want to believe; you quote some hack or pundit who says what you want to believe; or worse, you babble and spew your own nonsense, hoping the mudsplatter hits some of us and sticks.
It's not working. Stop over-analyizing and peeing on yourselves. You're not impressive in the least; most of America didn't hear a gaffe from Biden nor a clarification from Obama.
So, as one poster said, looks like a cookie was just a cookie. Move on children. There's another sandbox next thread.
Oh my word, perfection! You said it a little differently than I would have, however, I now have no need to add to this foolishness. What's the word...brouhahah? The overwrought on this thread can only be guilty of a bit of a kerfluffle...and an impotent one at that.
Rham, in his book " the plan" said that the change will not be that easy and will happen slowly. Maybe he is beginning to have doubts that it will even happen in his lifetime. They seem to be following the blueprints in the book pretty closely.
I am not at all sure Joe Biden misread Pres-Obama at all, Joe-AIPAC appears to be listening to the wrong 'leader'.
Obama's test is health care reform. If he doesn't pass a health care reform bill with the public option than he is toast. It is really that simple.
I couldn't agree more. That is all you read in the opinion pages of the news media and the news shows. For some reason they keep trying to take that off of the centersatge and get us to talk about something else. We need Larry the cable guy out there in washington to tell them to " get er done."
The problem with healthcare, appears to be that the greater majority of citizens want 'Single Payer' health care, but the Corp-Healthcare Exec/CEO likes profit levels that enable an opulent lifestyle.
So far citizens=0, Exec/CEO=$.
well, he hasn't delivered on any of his promises
so what is the delay and appeasement agenda all about?
and i voted for him this time.
Yes he can
No, ... it is time for "Yes he must!"
This is a good way to understand the Biden and Emanuel gaffes. Remember the old Hollywood "walk this way" joke? Here the presidential gait proved too nondescript to mimic. They saw the walk but couldn't tell what "this way" was. The joke misfired.
President Obama should see this as a sign of things gone awry. I fear he won't but instead will delight in keeping us guessing. He should know the price this carries. On several issues the policy ball has shifted to Congress. That is good in a way. It is more little-d/r democratic and republican. But it's not how things get done here.
The years since Reagan have been disastrous. The federal government was on the one hand crippled, on the other unleashed, in all the wrong ways. To turn this around requires laws, executive orders, initiatives, appointments, and understandings with other political agents. None of this stands a chance without making it clear what it means to "do the same" here as there.
Maybe President Obama doesn't care enough to do all that's needed. Right now he is blending nicely into the presidency, but he's becoming a figure in a portrait gallery, like any of a number of presidents you don't associate with lasting achievements. He's becoming President Zelig.
That he is black does not offset the fact that a Yale literature professor just called him vague. That makes a whole lot unambiguous.
heh...you sound so confident. so sure of yourself...maybe you would like to be President of the United States.
at least, thank the father in heaven, John McCain isn't President.
Sentiment agreed more or less. But STILL he makes a point worth listening to. Don't you agree? Or are you a little vague on that?
If America were not a nation of parasites (80% importation now causing Blow Back), we would have neither McCain or Obama as President, Ralph Nader acurately described every failure American citizens have allowed our Corp-Gov (Military-Industrial-Complex) to create in the last almost 100-years, and had stearn but workable programs that (everyone) could bite the bullet in attempt to resolve.
Obama appears to be following every error of past government-failure, it is indeed a fool that keeps repeating the same failure over and over, hoping something different will happen.
"nation of parasites"? How very telling of your soul.
The Biden slip-up isn't a surprise, given Biden's feelings toward Israel and his proclivity for misspeaking. As for whether he was repeating something that may have been discussed with his boss, it is Obama's nature to consider all sides of an argument. There is no doubt though that Biden was NOT speaking for the White House.
So, what is a leader to do? Let the remark stand and let Israel infer some implicit blessing from it? He had to address it. He had to contradict it. He is the President and nobody speaks for him on such matters.
The other was a little more surprising as the Chief of Staff appears to be a quite a bit more buttoned up and in synch with his boss than Biden. I can't speculate as to why he would say that the public option was negotiable. Regardless of whether it is, it serves the President no good at this point for a trusted advisor to say so. Of course having to deny it paints him into a bit of a corner, but assuming that Emmanuel took a page from the Biden book on this one, the President had no choice but to assert that nobody but the President establishes policy on such matters.
Perhaps such slips ups are just proof that our President chooses strong people and allows them to speak their mind, a good trait. Perhaps the fact that (other than Biden) such retractions are rare speaks well of the administration.
Well said.
Vice President Biden was absolutely speaking for the President - after all, VP Biden is the resident expert on all foreign policy matters in this administration - and, both Israel and Iran got the message loud and clear, even if you and many others did not.
LizM,
This position Pres-Obama has taken concerning Iran shows a deliberate error that does not favore America or our bets interest's, but in fact is lock-step with the old Bush-Admin (error's) that today every one has been debunked by leaders and experts that have proper expertise, consider this...
1) Pres-Ahmadinejad never said he wanted to "Wipe Israel Off Map."
2) Iran Ahmadinejad and Cleric-Khamenei both said they do not want Atomic-Weapons.
3) IAEA-Cheif essentially called Bush-Admin "liars" about Iran Iran Nuclear Weapons.
4) AIEA thousands of hours of inspections and monitors say Iran producing "low-level enriched uranium" suitable for Power Planst only.
5) CIA testified in 2007 that Iran dropped Nuclear Weapons in 2003.
6) Gen Bergner's "stockpile of Iran weapons found in Iraq" was inspected by a (real) military expert that said "none of these are from Iran", and Pentagon dropped charge.
7) Iran has oldest Jewish settlement (3000-years) of any surrounding Arab nations.
It's a little surprising that a man in your position could be so politically naive.
"Therefore, if we can make the enemy show his position while we are formless, we will be at full force while the enemy is divided" Sun Tzu
Would Obama have read Sun Tzu? I have, and many of my generation have and did. But he? I don't know.
I do hope that your inferance that this is his "MO" is correct. (any way, I think that's what you meant to infer)
If that is indeed the presidents MO, then I say all is well. At least as well as it may be.
America wants a diplomatic President that knows how to make peace, not war.
For those that have looked deeply enough into Americas past police actions and other undeclared-wars, it becomes obvious that every one of these were either trying to empress other Empires with the US-Empire prowess, or involved enemies that our Shadow-Gov had set up in the first place.
Not only did our Shadow-gov set them up, but often trained and armed, and certainly supported. That is until (our enemy) got out of control, and it became necessary to send Americas youth as military to regain control (of our enemy).
Yes, we can. He never said Yes, I can. That means ordinary people must organize and exert overwhelming pressure, and he will go in that direction. Should there be a march on Washington for the public health care, it will be done. If we sit on our behinds, all the push will come from those who are gaining from the status quo.
I don't agree with the premise of this article. I understand where Bromwich is coming from, but seriously, you can't argue that Obama's intentions are wrong, you can't argue that he isn't smart enough to self-correct, he is exactly where he wants to be, regardless of all the backseat driving, 5 months in we are on course, his equanimity hasn't failed him thus far, should he be only 85% this way, or would another ratio be to Bromwich's liking? Or better yet, scrap the whole approach to governance and rebuild the swing mid-season, cause that batting average is above .500, which leaves us with a half-full glass.
And a Hall-Of-Famer.
I agree. People seem to ignore that at the core of Obama's political philosphy is that he intends to govern by concensus. Does that mean getting everybody to agree on everything? No, that is silly. But the main idea here is democracy. Plain and simple. He will set in motion conversations on policy in order to gain consensus. We have seen that he fully intends to lead these discussions. . Will this always work? I don't know. But I have high hopes that we as a nation will get a renewed sense of what the democratic process should be about, if we pay attention and not get distracted by all of the "noise."
Futher, I am getting annoyed with all of this back seat driving. If you have listening to all of his speeches here and abroad you can't help but notice the consistency with which he articulates this core message. How many times has he said, "its not about me, it's about YOU."
Don't forget to add: Obama's not too particular where this "consensus" comes from or who it consists of. Case in point: the bank job. The only "consensus," as I recall, was among the bankers and the politicians. The "it's about YOU" rest of us were not on board for this. But that's alright: our time will come. We too can become part of Obama's "consensus"; we just have to "consent" to the things our rulers want him to do.
I can't associate the words, “truth”, “facts” or “honest” with any politician but obviously some see all these characteristics in Biden, the Messiah!
VP Biden is a stakeholder in the Obama administration, and one who insists on sitting in presidential meetings but acts like an outsider when it suits him.
Someone should wake him up because it seem, he is failing to understand his new reality, that he is the VP, and that one misspeak can cause disruptions in the US economy and all sorts of other problems in and outside the USA.
He is the older and more experienced politician and yet the one that is acting neither his age nor experience. The President is a busy man, and should not be spending time firefighting the irresponsible utterances of his much older VP.
Ha! "Biden, the Messiah! Now, that's a first - and laugh-out-loud funny, on so many different levels. Thank-you.
Obama's leadership style is driven by broad principles. He won't stick out his neck on policy details. He won't challenge conventional wisdom.
He'll push his principles to the extent he believes they are politically viable, and he'll leave the details to congress. He'll try to stay just ahead of the curve, but while he may occasionally get out in front of congress, he won't get out in front of public opinion.
He's not the kind of reformer that seeks to change people's minds. He seeks to repackage public opinion in a way that congress might find palatable. He knows that congress won't pass what the people want no matter how much political capital he burns.
You could be right. You describe a perfect approach for international diplomacy but I don't think it's enough to garner anything substantial domestically.
Obama's only demonstrable principle is compromise.
Obama believes that coming off the bench to score 6 points in a couple of minutes of game time and buffing up his personal stats is the same as winning the game. It's not.
Obama's staff believes that gaining a couple of yards is the same as a first down or winning a game. They're like the kid who comes off the bench in the 4th quarter makes one play that gains a couple of yards and celebrates wildly.
Minor advances, itty-bitty insignificant gains, lots of hullabaloo about so very little.
These are not changes, only insignificant minor adjustments.
If hope is enough for you, great. Become a White Sox fan, like Obama.
I want real change.
Turns out that Obama is a great speaker and campaigner.
But, so far he sucks at being the leader and head of the Federal Government.
He's simply out of his depth. And, I haven't much hope that will change - it is becoming increasingly obvious that Obama is a dilettante that is more interested in shining his own image than he is in running a government. A slick, but empty, suit.
we're 8 months in
Alex Cockburn has posted a fine piece this week about Obama's Biden problem:
http://counterpunch.com/cockburn07102009.html
I opened your link - don't even ask - but I couldn't get past the first paragraph because that's all it took before I knew that Alex Cockburn doesn't care about the facts. I tend to shy away from pieces that don't care about the facts.
Please tell me what facts he got wrong.
Silly cherry picking. The vast majority of Obama's actions show strong leadership of his cabinet and this country.
The truth of the matter is that this isn't a case of "silly cherry picking". It is an example of wholly misinformed analysis, at least insofar as his take on the Vice President's statements, which the professor clearly does not understand, much less portray accurately.
They do not. The vast majority of his cabinet are conservatives and Clintonistas, preservers of the failed status quo.
Professor Bromwich, I appreciate metaphors and see their value when communicating concepts and ideas. But honestly, sometimes a cookie is just a cookie.
Regarding VP Biden's words and their meaning: Biden is probably the most straight-forward politician...if not individual...I know. When he communicates, he is refreshingly honest and one rarely, if ever, need second-guess his meaning. He is the world's "anti-B.S.er."
So, when Joe Biden says something is a cookie, I know it is indeed, a cookie.
;-)
And then we ought to be worried when Joe goes around saying that if Israel wants to bomb bomb Iran, that's up to them! Not what i think BObama has in mind. Definitely not what i have in mind either. Joe's 'cookie' was one of the most burnt offerings he as made to this day, to my way of thinking.
The only problem with your logic is that Vice President Biden said and meant nothing of the sort. On the contrary, Biden's words were pretty profound, as per usual, and he was putting pressure on Israel to the point that if they were thinking of some sort of military action in Iran, they are definitely having second and third thoughts about it after the Vice President's statement.
Are you the least bit aware of Biden's history on this subject? If you are, I'd love to discuss this further with you. If not, you should probably do a bit of research in order to become a bit better informed.
And, if I may offer some advice, I wouldn't rely too heavily on the media or blogosphere or punditocracy because the truth of the matter is that the vast majority of this group do not understand anything Joe Biden says, much less report accurately on it...they simply are not smart enough.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
