Amateur historians who probably never liked him anyway have for some time now been calling what is now our greatest natural catastrophe "Obama's Katrina," and hoping that what appears at this point to be a mini-scandal, Joe Sestak's claim that he was offered a job for not running for the Senate, will grow into a full-blown Watergate-type scandal.
But real historians tell us two things about Presidents and scandal: it's rarely the crime and usually the cover-up that derails Presidents and past is often prologue. If both of those things are true then President Obama is now being tested in almost exactly the manner that Joe Biden warned us he would be, only instead of the foreign policy crisis he imagined, it turns out that it may be a clumsy oil spill and an even clumsier hack congressman who may just reveal to us what our President is made of.
Here's what anybody who's not faith-based in their devotion to the President can reasonably deduce happened in the Sestak case: Rahm Emmanuel asked for and received permission from his boss to offer Sestak the position of Secretary of the Navy in exchange for his not running for the Senate, perhaps without realizing that it broke a federal law exactly written for such situations. Which then brings us to our Nixonian moment wherein we all know what Tricky Dick would have done, but we're not quite sure about Smooth Barack. But we will soon find out.
If he's Nixonian he'll continue on the path he's started down, having his White House Counsel craft a response that raises more questions than it answers and sending Bill Clinton out to tell a story which is either true but not the story being asked about, or merely just a bad lie, trying to get us to believe that Sestak was offered the juicy job of being on an advisory board in order to give up his Senatorial ambitions.
As for the Great Spill of '10, it's Jimmy Carter not Nixon whose ghost threatens to cast a pall over Obama's Presidency for just as one could plausibly argue that the taking of the American hostages in Iran weren't quite his fault, so too its difficult to fault Obama for this tragedy-at least in its early stages. But history can be cruel to those who lead and while it may be true that Carter's inability to free the hostages and Obama's inability to plug the hole weren't their faults, none of that may be enough to stop the image of men paraded in blindfolds and oil gushing into the ocean from defining these two men and their presidencies.
Ironically, it may be President Obama himself who most clearly articulated what the American people want from him in the Gulf of Mexico and what they wanted from Carter in '79 when he spoke during the health care debate of "bending the cost curve," leaving a mental picture of a sort of Superman President who could have his way in any situation through the power of brute force by doing something -anything- to relieve the sense of powerlessness that engulfed Carter and now threatens Obama.
As President Obama faces a major scandal, the Great Spill, and a mini-scandal, the sordid Sestak affair, it will be his reactions to these and not even the scandals themselves that will tell us the kind of man he truly is and history will record whether he joins the ranks of woefully inept Presidents like Nixon and Carter or transcends them by showing the kind of leadership that Americans yearn for from their Presidents but rarely seem to get.
Follow Mark Joseph on Twitter: www.twitter.com/markmjm
They can't even agree that Toast should be brown on both sides
It's interesting that the author doesn't mention Bush ....especially after he lied and invaded Iraq (supposedly because we were attacked by Saddam). Mark Joseph, how should we remember Bush? Or would you like for us to forget this very recent history.
At any rate, Rahm knows all the secrets so he can become VERY high maintenance for Obama if he wants to.
He must continue to call out the obstructionists and destructionists of the right. Most Americans still want him to succeed because it's for the good of all. Honesty will take him a long way. His saying, "I could have reacted quicker/stronger/more comprehensively to the Gulf" (even if untrue) will sound good. An honest and accurate response to the allegations regarding Sestak will be equally salubrious. Defensiveness will only feed the attack dogs of the right. He doesn't need to sound like a deranged tea-bagger to project decisiveness and a clear vision. Failing to do so could ruin his presidency--and the country.
Good catch.
Like a stucco sandwich...........
He's kinda' sloppy and inconsistent.....but he's not abrasive
TM
They must not be qualified to even WATCH Obama run said hotdog cart...
Truth is, he's more than qualified and that scares the hell out of Republicans. If he weren't, you Prom Queens wouldn't try so damned hard to see to it that he fails...
You wouldn't know the truth about anything political if it jumped up and bit you because you are far too busy ingesting and regurgitating the talking points of idiots.
gah.
After months and soon years of repetition and variation, these little thought-worms bore into most people's remembrances and emotional senses of the men described-- and very very often, they are wrong and purposely made to mislead--- Jimmy Carter is now most often portrayed as 'helpless', most of all because of the Iran hostage crisis, when it's now common knowledge that due to a secret deal Reagan's campaign had made with the ayatollah's regime, no solution to the crisis would come until Reagan took office.
In other words, Carter's helplessness was a direct result of hidden machinations of a guy who is portrayed as 'sunny and optimistic', and less often as 'aguy whose cynical machinations with a foreign power in a crisis helped him secure his office through an arms for hostages deal.' And ifCarter seemed helpless re petroleum consumption, it was only because he told the people the truth about depending on hostile powers for our energy needs at a time when nobody much wanted to listen, while sunny Reagan told Americans they had no worries-- full speed ahead toward Morning in America. It may dawn on most of us now, that Reagan was wrong, and Carter was right. But helpless Jimmy and sunny Ron are nonetheless stuck in our brains.
Is your name deepthroat?
Typical republican dirty trick.
Now, inform yourself or go play in the kiddy pool.
When the public is dumber than the poeple that we elect, then we are in serious sh*t!
No logical person can blame Barack for "failure" when the very legislative body that is supposed to co-govern is shattered to pieces. You can replace President Obama with whatever person you'd like, but until Congress is held accountable for sitting on their hands and playing politics 24/7, nothing will change.
If all hands were on deck and he simply managed to screw up then I couldn't make a case for him. But when he has so much help from the opposition making even the simplest of tasks a proverbial act of God, then why do we isolate Obama as if he had the final say?
Does no one else in Washington govern anymore? I guess not. It seems there is only one person in Washington making any decisions is the person who will get blamed either way. If he acts, government is too intrusive and socialist. If he sits back and let's businesses-do-business, then he is aloof and unengaged.
You can't have it both ways. And it's time that you expanded your questioning/criticism to the true do-nothings in Washington.
Stop giving Obama a pass.
Also, Republicans in the 90's were at least respectable, even if disagreeable.
You, my friend, are comparing apples and oranges. Today's Republicans wouldn't even EXIST in the 90's.
That Tea Party and Wingnut herd that you ballyhoo will be the downfall of the Republican party as we know it.
It's hard to face facts when you don't know which one of your two faces you'd rather confront it with...
fanned.
"Rahm Emmanuel asked for and received permission from his boss to offer Sestak the position of Secretary of the Navy"
Tell me, how is that possible since that appointment had already been made?
But hey, go ahead, believe whatever and whomever you want. Truth will out. I trust this President.
Believe as you like/whatever flies with your own agenda. I prefer truth. Find me the proof that this is what happened, and I will acknowledge it. Until you can do that, you only assist in the spreading of an unproven/disproven meme.
If the Republican members of Congress were in corporate America, they would have been fired months ago for "Failure To Show Up To Work"
Did we learn from the experience? Two words: Rand Paul.