Watching the news this week I finally got the right word to describe President Obama: feckless. Obama the Feckless. This epithet has been a long time coming but after two years of agonizing, I finally got the right word.
It came to me on Thursday night watching Lawrence O'Donnell reporting that Obama has been strangely silent on Wisconsin and the right wing attack on collective bargaining, which, if successful, will gut the unions and a cornerstone of Democratic party power. After initially mumbling a few words of support, there was some media criticism, and so, predictably by now, Obama withdrew and has been a silent witness to the potential demise of is own party, to say nothing about the demise of one of the basic rights American workers fought so hard to establish. He has no plans to travel to Wisconsin.
Then there was the report from Anderson Cooper interviewing a Libyan woman in Tripoli who said that she and everyone she knew had been extremely disappointed by Obama's speech that morning. What was needed, she said, was strong support for the people's movement, not diplomatic platitudes.
What he concentrated on instead was the announcement of his support for gay marriage, which, while important, seemed strangely disjointed, given these other crucial national and world events. While Rome burns, he is jockeying for 2012.
Throughout history, different epithets have distilled a leader's tenure in power. One thinks of Alexander the Great, William the Conqueror, Richard the Lionhearted, Louis XIV the "Sun King." There has also been Charles the Bald, Lorenzo the Magnificent, Edward the Confessor, Thatcher the "Iron Lady."
Obama will certainly go down as the first black American president, and this is how he will probably be remembered in the history books. But in terms of the actual significance of his leadership and what he substantively has done during his tenure, feckless -- which means "unable or unwilling to do anything," or "lacking the organization necessary to succeed" -- is the only apt word.
The tragedy of Obama is that he came into office with more political and moral capital than any president in modern American history. He represented transformation. So expectant was the world that they gave him a Nobel Peace Prize in anticipation of his greatness. He has squandered it all, not in any valiant fight for ideals or change, but in compromise, temporizing, and vacillation. Even in terms of the Defense of Marriage Act, his announcement was that he had changed his mind.
John Kennedy once observed that power either stabilizes or destabilizes a person. Power has destabilized President Obama.
His potential for transformational greatness has been short circuited by an unwillingness or inability to actually lead. He has somehow lost himself in short term tactical calculations and in the self-delusion that he is somehow a grand conciliator, someone who will preside over squabbling Democrats and Republicans. Given the realities of both parties, combined with his own deficiencies, nothing could be farther from the truth. What is needed in the presidency is a leader, not a referee.
As we approach 2012, we need to face the sad fact that Barack Obama is not up to the job. He is too young, too inexperienced, too out of his depth. Bill Clinton was right, Obama was a "fairy tale." He needed to wait eight years. Obama's premature presidency has revealed him to be feckless and condemned the country to the politics of paralysis. Coming in the aftermath of the disastrous presidency of George Bush, it is a real question whether the nation will soon recover, whoever wins the next election.
Democrats used to support the interests of labor. It is unclear just what they support now. In the two years that the Democrats controlled the house, senate and oval office, they could have passed legislation that would have done away with "right-to-work" labor laws, laws intended to prevent formation of a union, and could have passed "card check", a law that makes it relatively easy to form a union. But, they didn't.
The Democrats could have past meaningful health care reform. However, they disallowed any testimony describing the advantages of a single payer system. So, now we are stuck with a mandate that guarantees enormous profits for the for-profit private health insurance industry.
The Democrats could have investigated Bush for war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan. But they didn't.
For me, the most feckless moment to date was Obama's "beer summit". Here, Obama proposed that a racially charged issue between a college professor and a police officer could be simply resolved by sharing a beer at the White House.
Well, at least one thing we can say for sure is that he's not feckless.
Sometimes, I wonder if we knew what he knew if we'd be able to live with it, let alone act on it. As periodically happens in capitalist societies, the chicken and egg interaction of US excesses and global forces in 2008 signaled a sea change in US direction and fortunes.
If we remain, in spirit, the US of old, we will come out of it stronger and wealthier. If instead, we fall back into the US policy of old, all bets are off.
The Bush administration fell off the balanced beam when nobody was even breathing on them. Obama's group is walking strong in the midst of a tempest.
Did you say, Obama's hard to replace?
Not a polling aggregator.
Dean/Warren 2012
Jim Garrison's essay is spot on. I agree with everything he said, and I take responsibility for picking Obama before he was ready. I also persuaded others to vote for Obama by making phone calls and knocking on doors in my county as a volunteer for his campaign. I regret that now.
Going forward, I’m not sure what I'll do in 2012. I'll certainly support state and local progressive candidates and help with the recall of Scott Walker and my State Senator if he votes for Walker’s so-called budget repair bill.
If Democrats and the progressive base work hard to strengthen progressive influence in the US Congress, it may not be as important to re-elect a weak Democrat over a centrist Republican for president. Obama’s job performance proves that presidential power can be easily neutered by a strong Congress, in fact, by a strong minority party in Congress. Real power lies there.
These are interesting and very weird times. Everything changed and changed again in the span of two years. I wonder what will happen during these next two years.
I wish I could say I was excited to see what the future will bring. Unfortunately, my feckless president has affected my ability to hope.
Also, when the media asks him a tough question (if they ever will-that includes you Chuck Todd) don't let him answer in snooze control. For instance, let's say Obama does a deal with the devil and settles with the banks for a civil fine instead of prosecuting the ongoing criminality here. When answering the question Obama will most likely answer: Look (he drops his voice to act serious and sober) there is alot of pain out there, but we have to move on. It's best for....... That's when a questioner should say "Sir...isnt this a second bailout" "What do you tell people who were wrongfully foreclosed on." "Mr. President...why hasnt one banking executive gone to jail when the head of OTS admits violation of law...otherwise known as crime.
Can somebody finally question this feckless, vacuous (or whatever you want to call him) President?
Citations please - otherwise you assertion isn't believeable.
Examples, please.
That is who Obama is - a de facto moderate Republican, who dresses up in liberal drag during campaigns.
feckless -- which means "unable or unwilling to do anything," or "lacking the organization necessary to succeed"
His "legacy" made, no need to press on anything but re-election.