Selective Lion

This week, we learned that President Obama really is capable of political courage and idealism, as well as calculation. The question is how he will apply these gifts to the financial crisis as well as to issues closer to both his heart and to the strengths of his intellect, such as defense of the Constitution.

Each of his major speeches of the past week was a tour de force. At Notre Dame he spoke candidly and movingly about reproductive rights and tolerance. His quest for common ground won repeated applause from this largely Catholic audience, some of whom evidently are less dogmatic than their church's leaders. Said Obama:

So let us work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions, let's reduce unintended pregnancies. (Applause.) Let's make adoption more available. (Applause.) Let's provide care and support for women who do carry their children to term. (Applause.) Let's honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause, and make sure that all of our health care policies are grounded not only in sound science, but also in clear ethics, as well as respect for the equality of women." Those are things we can do. (Applause.)

At Annapolis, he sounded as resolutely committed to national defense as any chicken hawk, and rather more serious about what true national security entails -- and he got repeated ovations from the midshipmen, among them John McCain IV.

Speaking in the Rose Garden on Friday about credit card abuses, Obama signed a bill that takes a small step on behalf of consumers to prohibit the most extreme of bait-and-switch tactics. The President said, "Statements will be required to tell credit card holders how long it will take to pay off a balance and what it will cost in interest if they only make the minimum monthly payments. We also put a stop to retroactive rate hikes that appear on a bill suddenly with no rhyme or reason." Credit card abuses are the easiest to remedy of the financial scandals, but Obama was on the right side of the issue and in good form.

It was his major address Thursday at the National Archives, with America's most sacred documents as backdrop, that was Obama at his most thoughtful and eloquent, as well as brave. "I have studied the Constitution as a student;" he declared, "I have taught it as a teacher; I have been bound by it as a lawyer and legislator. I took an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution as Commander-in-Chief, and as a citizen, I know that we must never -- ever -- turn our back on its enduring principles for expedience sake."

Obama stuck to his decision to close the prison at Guantanamo, just a day after the Senate, by a vote of 94-6, denied him the funds to shift detainees, out of concern that alleged terrorists would be instead locked up in maximum security prisons in the continental United States, possibly to escape or might someday be released into American communities. It's an absurd worry, yet where to house terrorists is for most legislators the ultimate NIMBY issue.

Obama himself muddied the waters in his insistence that he planned to keep detainees in "prolonged detention," just not at Guantanamo. That, in turn, created the sense that Obama's insistence about shutting down the prison was more about symbolism than constitutional substance.

His rather complex position provided fodder for critics on both the right and the left. Dick Cheney appointed himself to make a quasi-official response, in an unrepentant speech defending torture. I suppose we are fortunate that the faces of today's Republican Party are Cheney and Rush Limbaugh, guaranteeing that the Republicans will stay around 30 percent of the electorate. On the other hand, it is odd that Obama would seize on the symbolism of Guantanamo as abhorrent and inconsistent with American values while insisting that "prolonged detention" without trial for accused terrorists could be justified. In a letter sent Friday to the president, Sen. Russ Feingold warned that "such detention is a hallmark of abusive systems that we have historically criticized around the world."

The New York Times editorial page effusively praised the president's stance. Its editorial of May 22 began, "We listened to President Obama's speech on terrorism and detention policy with relief and optimism."

But in two news stories, May 23, Times reporters first pointedly questioned whether the prolonged detention concept was constitutional -- and then suggested that Obama had handed Republicans "a wedge issue."

Having taken a principled position, Obama now needs to deliver -- with a strategy for handling the remaining detainees that both addresses the security concerns and offers more than a fig leaf of constitutionality.

All week, Obama demonstrated his great skills as a teacher and orator, but it remains to be seen how he will use these outsized gifts as challenges on several fronts continue to unfold. He chose to invest some political capital on the issue of reproductive rights, but not on the issue of gay marriage; he took a real political risk in beginning the process of shutting down the infamous prison at Guantanamo but not in aligning himself with a constitutional treatment of detainees wherever they are ultimately housed. And though he criticized financial excess in general terms and had some good things to say about credit card abuses, he has not yet thrown the full weight of his office behind comprehensive financial reform.

It is tempting to explain his choices simply in terms of his own history and deep knowledge of some issues but not others. If there is any issue that Obama knows well, it is constitutional law. One can see the blend of idealism and calculation in his decision to close Guantanamo, but not to insist on full due process for detainees. Maybe this is all that public opinion and anxious legislators can take for now. We'll have to see how the public reacts as he moves forward with concrete plans to change procedures and move detainees.

On financial reform, however, it is very hard, based on past performance, to imagine Obama staking out a courageous position and trying to move public opinion on an issue where most of the Senate is siding with, say, Wall Street. In the coming months, there will be plenty of opportunities. They will include whether to enact regulation of derivatives, hedge funds and private equity companies; whether to support Elizabeth Warren's proposal for a financial product safety commission; whether to keep on bailing out insolvent banks versus taking them into receivership; and how to get serious about saving several millions of American families from foreclosure. On all of these fronts, administration policy to date has been too weak and far too kind to Wall Street.

One thing we learned this week is that whatever this president's deficits, they do not include a lack of eloquence, leadership, or nerve. It makes his attempt to straddle the issue of the detainees seem less than fully thought through, and his dithering on the financial crisis all the more bewildering.

Robert Kuttner is co-editor of The American Prospect and a senior fellow at Demos. His recent book is Obama's Challenge.

Comments

[LynnW49]

"If there is any issue that Obama knows well, it is constitutional law."

Applying it is another thing. War crimes. Habeas corpus. DADT. Marriage equality.

"whatever this president's deficits, they do not include a lack of eloquence, leadership, or nerve."

Eloquence, yes. Nerve and leadership, not so much.

[XME]

Every president we've ever had and ever will have, has had their flaws...they are after all, still only human. As an Independent, I voted for Obama because I saw in him qualities that I've not seen in a presidential candidate in my lifetime: careful and serious though on ALL angles and opinions before making a decision, and a desire to be president for the best reason I can think of: to ty try and do his part to make this a bettter country for his girls to grow up in. Yup, he has flaws, and I don't agree with every decision he makes, but unlike many of our recent past presidents, I have to say that I do always (thus far) trust his motives and the consideration he gives every decision before making it.

[biglover]

Thank you XME. Your post is as rational and sane as any I have read. I am a democrat, not an independent but I too saw and still see things in this man I have never seen in a candidate and I have lived a long time. I do not agree with everything but I do know he is trying to make this a better country. We all have flaws and I too trust his motive and the consideration he gives to each decision.

Thank you.

[johnie2xs]

Being in agreement with both, you gentleman, I would like to add just one more thought.

We have been wowed by the intelligence, and purposeful deliberative manner, that this man has displayed in such a short period of time, and YET there are these Luddites out there, even among his own party, who decry his moves for not being swift enough.

I see a man playing 3D chess, in a checker world. Time is on his side. I'm not saying he should get any kind of free ride, but just the opportunity to do what he's doing.

Which to me is, just fine.

[dhampton100]

Being well aware of the opinions of lots of Constitutional scholars, including Jonathan Turley, I must say that , for now, I continue to agree with President Obama. When I look at the opinions of all of the “experts” on any particular subject I am left with one conclusion: That is the ONLY subject they are considering, whether it’s an expert on wall street, Constitutional law or whatever. Mr. Obama is dealing with ALL of the issues not simply the singular issue the particular “expert” is pontificating about.

[biglover]

No one will satisfy Turley. He's a professor. That says enough for me.

Turley is a doomsday specialist.

[JDM73]

We all know that the president is a fine public speaker, and that he's acquainted with constitutional law. (What some people might not know is that other scholars of constitutional law, like Jonathan Turley and Glenn Greenwald, have repeatedly taken issue with Obama. Having been a constitutional lawyer does not give the president divine insight and infallibility.) Unfortunately, the ability to give a good speech isn't enough. As long as he continues to lean right when making major decisions, we'll be going down the wrong road. Closing Guantanamo doesn't mean anything if you're just going to continue the same practices somewhere else.

[biglover]

And neither of them no matter what they say, are experts on matters to which they do not have all the facts. Remember, Obama has more information at hand and has to make real life decisions based on his information and not based on what far left progressives think. He never ran as a bleeding heart liberal (of which I am one). He is also a pragmatist and a very very smart guy,

Give the guy some time to take care of the mountains of problems he faces. He is trying and we should support his effort.

He asked us for our support and we should give it to him

[provgrays]

Whatever Obama accomplishes, he brings a unique combination of gifts and they should be emulated.

[We-Are-The-Ones]

I agree. Patience. Inclusiveness. Diplomacy. Thoughtfulness. Communication. More patience. Maturity.

The disappointment people express with Obama is anticipatory disappointment and they relish it almost as much as the warmongering right relish fearmongering.

The man has been in office four months and is dealing with a multiplicity of complex issues. He has only asked the American public to remain knowledgeable and involved. He has only asked for patience so that he has time to set things in motion to see how they work. But some are too impatient to give the man time to even create a policy. Indeed, the preventive detention people are up in arms about is not yet a policy. It is one of the things that "might" need to be considered for the remaining Gitmo detainees "once" all the cases have been reviewed. But the review is not even completed. Preventive detention may not be necessary. We do not know and the President does not know.

But people are already disappointed before anything even happens. They are already impatient after 4 months.

[Tulka2]

We see the army of orcs before us. You speak as if you are comfortably ensconced and i am happy for you. Some of us are out on the edge. You would do well to understand that.

Okay, i will rephrase that. It's not an army. The rich, the oligarchs, are actually very few, but they surround Obama now. He doesn't even meet with single-payer advocates... who are mostly health care worker, doctors and nurses. We are being ignored. This is not something we are making up because, as you seem to imply we get off on it. For shame.

[biglover]

I know. I posted something similar. Ridiculous isn't it. They want everything done overnight that has taken 10 years in the making.

[notthistime]

good post

[We-Are-The-Ones]

The President's excellent speeches on the economy, on supporting our military, on energy dependency, on healthcare reform, and on Guantanomo and the two wars is an example of him articulating the work that he is doing and that is being done.

It is not that he gives speeches to speak, but rather he gives speeches to inform, educate and calm Americans and the world. His policies are there whether he speaks or not.

Time is needed to see if those policies work. But you know what? I am confident that if the policies do not work, this President will assess, re-assess, modify and move on. These are the qualifies of a good leader.

[Sweetbay]

Well said. I wouldn't want anyone else tackling these problems at this difficult time. He is the only one.

[We-Are-The-Ones]

I think he has an excellent cabinet. And they are doing amazing work, despite Congress.

I worry more over Congress than I do over the administration. When the Repubs are dominating the news, talking, talking and talking, the Dems remain silent. We need all leaders working. I am hopeful that Congress will realize that it is the majority now. We need better leaders in the Senate. Harry Reid is pathetic.

[Tulka2]

I can't think of anyone better either. When the right says we have "drunk the Kool-aid or insinuates we think him the messiah...? They have got it all wrong.

We know Jesus was a man. We know Gandhi was a man. We know Obama is a man. That's really what the right is afraid of. They are afraid he is THAT kind of man.

[JohnnyBoyyy]

I agree. President Obama helped bring me into political process during the campaign. Due to his call to arms to offer our talents to others in our communities, I will continue to increase my volunteer work for those people that could use my help. It feels good and keeps me informed and involved in doing my part to make our nation a better place for all.

Who remembers how they felt watching this man with the unusual name speaking to a crowd of over 250,000 in Berlin last summer? I, for one, found myself with tears in my eyes for the pride I felt being an American for the first time in a very long time. I was always an Independent voter, but I quickly knew this man was our hope for a new direction for America and that the world would see that we can change.

Let the man do this. He has shown in this short time that he is not shy and is not only a great speaker, but a compassionate, intelligent human being. And, always remember that Washington has become a very hostile, greedy place. To accomplish all the things President Obama must get done in order for our nation to become what our ancestors envisioned, he has a VERY big tiger by the tail.

[biglover]

Great posts. I could not agree more. I love this President and he is trying and after all what more can we ask of him,

I love him

[Anonani]

We are wide awake and rousing up the neighborhood too.

[Tulka2]

Push left, sister. Give him the political cover to go left.

[We-Are-The-Ones]

Don't push him to go left or right. Push him to do what is best for the whole country. Equal rights for all. A healed economy. Protection for our children. The end of all wars. Diplomacy with our enemy. Diplomacy with our allies.

Give him time to do his job.

Give him the political cover to do his job.

[LEFTturnonlyallowed]

For the myself, a long time leftist, Obama is disappointing. What I fear we have is another Clinton.... just a little bit to the left maybe, but Obama indicates tendencies that are a solid governing from the right. He also shows us he will turn far to the right if the political winds blow that way. A man of principle, he is not.

Look for more totally disastrous policies like NAFTA. Clinton gave us that monster and no far winged ideologue could have done better. The assault on the poor under Clinton was unprecedented under even the most reactionary Republican regimes.

Leftists: be prepared for more. These right wing Democrats are more dangerous than the far right wing.

[Sweetbay]

I agree about the Blue Dogs, but that isn't the President's fault. That's just what he has to work with. The fact is he has to find a way to get his legislation passed with the votes he can get and that means compromising sometimes.

[We-Are-The-Ones]

Obama is not Clinton. Just because Obama and Clinton share a party doesn't mean there will be shared experiences. I will judge Obama on what he does rather than on what someone else did in the 1990s.

Clinton wanted to "feel" your pain. Obama wants to avoid having the public feel pain at all. Take a look at what Obama has actually done rather than judging him with what Clinton did. For example to benefit working men and women:

Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility, and Disclosure (CARD) Act of 2009
Helping Families Save Their Homes Act
Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act
Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act
Small Business Act Temporary Extension
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
Children’s Health Insurance Reauthorization Act

Obama does not need to benefit the left. He needs to benefit the country. He is a man of principle, he just doesn't share yours and for that I am glad. I want a President who is not trying to keep score, but who is trying to rebuild a wrecked economy and to end two wars, among numerous other things.

[KofTX]

I agree whole-heartedly! I myself am not just tired of the whole left/right war of ideals, I clearly see that it is completely unsustainable. The political atmosphere as become more and more poisonous with each decade. For the sake of our country's future, we have got to let go of the mindset that the only good ideas come from one side of the political spectrum. It will ultimately be the undoing of effective government if we continue on this road of wedge issues and gotcha politics. We must show TRUE patriotism and find it within ourselves to see past party lines and personalities and seek to preserve what makes this country great----The right to disagree without having to be disagreeable. The ability to reinvent our selves with every election and every passage of legislation. This is what is truly at risk here.

[notthistime]

BRAVO BRAVO BRAVO!!! wonderful. post. excellent. co-signing.

[Tulka2]

All he has to do is get us single-payer health care. I am afraid the oligarchy now surrounds him and whispers in his ear. They say, "What is best for the rich, is best for all".

Obama said at a town hall meeting in New Mexico a couple of weeks ago that if he were starting from scratch, single-payer health care would be his choice, but that to do it now would be too "disruptive". It would be. Completely disruptive to the insurance industry.

This is life and death to me and many i know. Baby boomers were fired first in the down-turn. We will never be rehired if jobs are not disconnected from health care.

[We-Are-The-Ones]

Keep lobbying, then. Send e-mails and faxes to the White House. Ted Kennedy and I think 14-20 other Democrats are for single-payer. Join that movement.

if this is life and death for you, keep lobbying! Keep fighting. Lobby Obama, but lobby Congress as well. Lobby everyone.

Further, if baby boomers are being discriminated against, we have laws against that, too under the Civil Rights Act.

[Tulka2]

I call my Senators or meet at their offices or march for single-payer almost every day. I think left is what is best for most.

[notthistime]

he doesn't have to get us anything. WE have to work for it. he already set the ball rolling and now we have to pick up the ball and run with it. make phone calls to your congressmen, write letters, send emails, advocate in your community. Go to whitehouse.gov and attend a healthcare community party in your area to discuss this issue or host one of your own. . .. there is work to do for all.

[marisaelizabeth]

I think it is unfair to judge him until the president has had at least 12 months to settle in and do some real work. At that point I want asses what he has and has not done and then decide whether or not he has lived up to his word.

www.marisaelizabeth.com

[Tulka2]

You are correct, but some of us are dying out here and it's difficult to make a choice between a roof over your head or a packet of blackmail pay-off to the insurance industry. I hear nothing to assure me that Obama knows how people suffer. Fourteen thousand people a day are losing their jobs. Look it up. It's the right number.

[We-Are-The-Ones]

If you've heard nothing that assures you that President Obama understands the suffering of people, you have not been listening or paying attention. It means you have not heard a single town hall meeting or listened to a single press briefing.

Look at all the law that has been passed since President Obama became President to take care of people who are hurting.

Because of Obama, people have extended unemployment benefits, those making less than $250,000 received a tax cut, and the elderly and disabled received a $250 payment under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Because of Obama, people have a chance to stay in their homes under Helping Families Save Their Homes Act. Because of President Obama, Children have the opportunity for being covered for health care under the Children’s Health Insurance Reauthorization Act.

And there is more, so much more this president has done that you are apparently unaware of or do not care about. Take a look at www.whitehouse.gov and inform yourself.

[Shirley Fisk]

5/25/09
7:59pm
Alexandria,VA

RE:
"I have studied the Constitution as a student;" he declared, "I have taught it as a teacher; I have been bound by it as a lawyer and legislator. I took an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution as Commander-in-Chief, and as a citizen, I know that we must never -- ever -- turn our back on its enduring principles for expedience sake."
Pres.Obama

If.the.Bil­l.of.Right­s.is.not.h­onored.the­n.what.is.­left.of.th­e.Constitu­tion?

No"prevent­ive.detent­ion"is.con­stitutiona­l.

[We-Are-The-Ones]

As to what is constitutional or not, we let the court decide. The United States Supreme Court is the final arbiter on what is constitutional. Every lawyer and law student know this basic principle.

So, first let's see if this is going to be President Obama's actual policy after the cases of the Gitmo detainees are reviewed. This review has not been finished and won't be for a month or so.

And, if the President feels that preventive detention is necessary because the Bush administration captured terrorists and then tortured them, then they must be detained . . . if the Supreme Court concludes that doing so is constitutional. If it is unconstiutional, then they will be released.

[sneez54]

I also let Obama know that a couple of things he has done I disagree with. I won't ever follow blindly (the republicans like to demean us by saying we flip flop).
On the other hand I do like that he has to "spend Politcal capital". He isn't pretending to be a king/dictator like the past President. He didn't walk into the office and demand absolutely everything go his way now!

[We-Are-The-Ones]

It seems to me that there are many on the left who demand that Obama obey them or else. One guy even mentioned that "they" have guns to enforce their will. And presumaby this was a person on the left and not the right.

President Obama is not in office to obey anyone. He is there to do what he believes is legal and legally jusifiable to benefit us all.

I hope the President ignores the rabid left as he ignores the rabid right. Neither is willing to give him time or room to work to clean up the many messes left behind.

[PC Contrarian]

I've enjoyed your comments. You are reasonable and practical; qualities that are somewhat rare on this site. I also believe many of Obama's policies need time to work out, or not. I agree that he should ignore the rabid let and the rabid right; extremism is non-productive.
However, the far left won't be satisfied with "a half loaf of bread"; they want it all, and NOW.

It is in all our interest that Obama and Congress succeed; but that means different things to different people. We all want peace, freedom, prosperity, a clean environment, and justice; among other things. What we're arguing about is how to get there and what it will look like.

Demonizing the other side because they want a different process is intolerant and dysfunctional. On the other hand, I'm not convinced, like you, that Obama is devoid of political motives and will always do what he knows is best for the country; he's no Gandhi.

[robbep]

It is good to see so many people share my dissapointment with Obama. Just bcz I sent him money and voted for him does not mean I will support him regardless of what he does. I hope and pray that he succeeds in turning this country around but his willingness to compromise on every issue has me concerned. I dont care how smooth he might be, if people are not working and health care reform has been compromised away he is going to have a tough time getting his job back. Dont let the polls fool you O, a lot of us union workers knocked on doors and convinced people who normally wldnt have voted for him to do so, if unemployment is still high and wall street is his only concern he will have a tough time getting reelected.

[We-Are-The-Ones]

Many erroneous facts here. Let me address a few.

The President is working on unemployment, which was teh whole purpose of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The President is also working on healthcare reform. Wallstreet is not his only concern and you were paying attention to anything you would know that to be true. But if you want to be disappointed for disapointments sake, that is your right to do so.

I cannot imagine anyone would want this job if so many people are so easily and childishly disappointed after four months.

Your vote should not be so easily used as a weapon. Eventually, it will have little use. To balance out those who use their vote to threaten Obama, there will be many others who benefit from his actions. There is no more use for the rabid left than there is for the rabid right. Both want others to live in fear . . obey what we say or else.

[notthistime]

co-signing

[MarionWatts]

Honestly, the previous Administration, one member of which is scurrying about like a cross between a sewer rat and Banquo's ghost, left so much of a quagmire, it's dizzying to think exactly how Obama's about to deal with any of that mess. Has any President been left with so much on his plate?

I still think we should all step back and give the President time. The mistakes and the chaos left by the Bush Administration are not problems easily solved, and paying too much attention to one will lead to the others being left too long on the back burner.

http://emiliawahoo76.blogspot.com
http://myspace.com/virginiadem

[Tulka2]

How far are the rich willing to go to prevent the simple human right of health care? Would they go so far as to pull down the banking system so as to avoid single-payer health care? I am beginning to wonder. It feels like class war and it's not the working class that started it.

[PC Contrarian]

If health care is a human right that should be provided by government, then isn't food and housing also? Should government provide all of us with food stamps and should all of us live in government project housing, just to be fair? What about day care for children of working mothers and nursing homes for the elderly; all provided by the government? If health care is "a simple human right", aren't all of these as well? If so, then we all need transportation to work as well as a job. Should government provide all these necessities as human rights too? I'm not sure where, in your mind, you draw the line on government programs.

Then there's the nagging question of who is going to pay. Sooner or latter you run out of people to tax, because in a global economy; people will flee high taxation. Take for example, the flight of people from California and New York because of the high taxation that resulted from over commitments from those state governments. It has resulted in virtual bankruptcy, with that once great state of California having the lowest credit rating of the 50 states.

Idealism is one thing, practical results are another. You have an over emphasis on rights and an under emphasis on personal responsibility.

[blipblap]

What is so bewildering? Wall Street donated unprecedented amounts of money to Obama's campaign. It is payback time. pathetic.

[We-Are-The-Ones]

Millions of Americans, individuals Americans, also donated unprecedented amounts of money to Obama's campaign as well . . . in small increments and in their work. Millions of people campaigned and voted.

President Obama works for all Americans. He owes no allegiance to any one group. He is trying to clear up a catastrophic mess left in huge areas by prior administrations.

To benefit individuals, President Obama has actually signed the following legislation the names speak for themselves:

Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility, and Disclosure (CARD) Act of 2009

Helping Families Save Their Homes Act

Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act

Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act

Small Business Act Temporary Extension

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

Children’s Health Insurance Reauthorization Act

This doesn't benefit Wallstreet. It benefits all of us.

[notthistime]

stop making sense.