A Lesson For McCain and Obama

Everyone is scrambling to blame somebody for the collapse of the financial bailout legislation earlier today. Both parties will find plenty of people to blame. House Republicans will blame Speaker Pelosi for making a speech that was allegedly too partisan. Democrats will blame House Republicans for sticking to a dogmatically anti-government position at the expense of economic recovery. Many others will decide to blame Barack Obama or John McCain, depending on party affiliation, for allowing their campaigns to interfere with the negotiations.

But President Bush must be the person who is front and center as we assess blame. Regardless of whether this is an election season or not, the fact is that during moments of genuine crisis such as the current financial mess, we look to presidents to provide leadership and to be able to persuade different factions to join into alliances. Both candidates should look carefully at the president's role as they prepare to take on this challenge themselves.

What we have seen is that President Bush does not have any of the "political capital" that he boasted about after the 2004 election. Last week, he was unable to rally House Republicans behind this legislation or to build strong public support for the bill. In his public appearances and
statements, Bush was unable to make the case bridging the concerns of Main Street and Wall Street, showing how a bailout would help all parts of the economy.

Presidents don't have as much power as they think they will before they are elected. "Power," Lyndon Johnson once quipped, "the only power I've got is nuclear--and I can't use that."

But one of the most powerful tools that they do have, particularly in the age of radio, television, and now the internet, is the power to persuade. This skill involves much more than eloquent speech-making. To build support for contentious legislation, presidents must have earned sufficient trust to get opponents to do what they otherwise would not do. The public also has to have some confidence in the competence of the president to handle a measure that they generally don't think is good for the nation.

This time around, President Bush tried to build support for the package and he failed. House
Republicans refused to vote yes. Much of the public, in Democratic and Republican districts, agreed.

The weakness of the Bush presidency is painfully clear as we watch this week's legislative battle unfold. Congress might still very well agree on legislation, but this will only be because of skillful legislators brokering a compromise or fears that economic collapse will occur without legislation.

It is doubtful that, in the end, Bush will be the moving force behind successful legislation. The nervous look on President Bush's face when he appeared to address the nation a few days ago said it all, a far cry from the Bush we saw at ground zero after 9/11 with a bullhorn in one hand and his other around a fireman. Flawed intelligence, the problems with the execution of the war in Iraq, the inability to respond to Katrina, rampant secrecy and more have left the president in an extremely weak position.

Unfortunately, today made clear that the nation needs a strong president who is capable of providing some direction and inspiration out of this financial turbulence.

Julian E. Zelizer is a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School. He is currently editing a book about the Bush presidency that will be published by Princeton University Press and completing a book on the history of national security politics since World War II that will be published by Basic Books.

Comments

[XME]

There's plenty of blame to go around. What bothers me is that people are so partisan that they're only capable of seeing the faults of those whose views they oppose.

* Clinton and Dems should not have past bills in the 90s to get loans home loans available to people who simply cannot afford them.

* Bush and Repubs should not have pushed through so much deregulation considering how much greed their is on Wall Street at any cost.

* Republicans didn't produce the LOW number of votes they said they had.

* Bush is just a flat out abomination.

* McCain had NO business inserting his campaign into the middle of delicate negotiations in the hopes that it might benefit him.

* EVERY politician is more worried about their prospects on November 4th and the stance they take to protect that, then they do about taking a stand to do the right thing and have some gall. This included BOTH Obama and McCain...t­heir primary concern is how all of this will affect their chances.

* NO ONE has seemed able to explain to the average American why this is not just about saving fat cats, that it's about not cutting off your nose (those fat cats) to spite your face (your own savings and jobs).

* Pelosi had no business making that kind of speech right before they voted...yo­u wait until after the vote.

ALL of these people really need to grow up and stop placing blame on one

[maxx1]

Let's face it Johnson was really a repug. Big oil war ties. He was a puppet. I bet the repugs are afraid that Obamba might open "that bay of pig's thing." If you are game check out
http://itwasjohnson.impiousdigest.com/index.htm