Ramesh Ponnuru comments:
David Brooks, Jan. 9, 2009: "The conventional advice for presidents is: focus your energies on a few big things. Obama just blew the doors off that one. Maybe Obama can pull this off, but I have my worries. By this time next year, he’ll either be a great president or a broken one." Right now I'd say Obama is neither.
Well, obviously that bit of Brooksian rhetoric was untrue as far as the date goes. But it's not far from true. Right now, Obama's presidential legacy is hanging in the balance. If he signs a health care law based on the Senate bill, then I think he is a great president -- he has taken great steps to amelioriate a massive and nearly-intractable problem in American life. If he fails to pass that bill, then I think it is fair to call him a broken president. He would have time to come back, but his agenda will lie in ruins and his failure will, like Clinton's, be the most important thing about his presidency, at least on the domestic side.
All this makes the apparent lack of presidential urgency so strange. (Mary Landrieu: “He should have been more clear, and I am hoping that in the next week or two he will because that is what it is going to take if it is at all possible to get it done," Landrieu told reporters. "Mailing in general suggestions, sending them over the transom, is not necessarily going to work.”) I can't imagine what Obama is thinking.
Print
COMMENTS (5)
I understand Obama is speaking to the Republican caucus soon. I wish he would nail them down on their proposals - and on what their idea of bipartisan compromise is. They've been getting away with saying "we stand ready to work with the President", but their idea of compromise legislation seems to be legislation drafted by a Republican congress and signed by a Repub. president. That's neither compromise nor bipartisanship.
On health insurance, they seem to have 3 ideas: buying across state lines, a tax credit, and "malpractice reform". Ask them if we were to incorporate some of those ideas into a bill, what would they agree to in return? Is there ANYTHING that democrats want and Repubs. don ... view full comment
I understand Obama is speaking to the Republican caucus soon. I wish he would nail them down on their proposals - and on what their idea of bipartisan compromise is. They've been getting away with saying "we stand ready to work with the President", but their idea of compromise legislation seems to be legislation drafted by a Republican congress and signed by a Repub. president. That's neither compromise nor bipartisanship.
On health insurance, they seem to have 3 ideas: buying across state lines, a tax credit, and "malpractice reform". Ask them if we were to incorporate some of those ideas into a bill, what would they agree to in return? Is there ANYTHING that democrats want and Repubs. don't, that they would be willing to accept to get some of what they want? Anything? He really needs to nail them down on this. And what would the 3 GOP ideas do for people of modest means, who make too much for Medicaid, and who have had their insurance cut off because their kid developed a really serious and expensive disease? Well?
Same thing on energy and environment: if Kerry, Lieberman, and Graham can agree on a bill (which would apparently include some things the GOP wants, such as nuclear power and offshore drilling), will any other Republicans sign on? Snowe? Collins? McCain? Nail them down on this.
Don't defend Brooks. He's a certified dolt. You can only make yourself look bad.
Don't defend Brooks. He's a certified dolt. You can only make yourself look bad.
though I am against selling across state lines generally, I see no reason if there are minimally accepted Federal standards why this would be a problem. Alone it would be a disaster, but with those standards can potentially safe a lot of money if insurance companies that are hq'ed in low overhead areas could then pass some of those savings to consumers. And I got nothing against tort reform or a tax credit if it will some repubs aboard.
I can imagine what Obama is thinking, he is waiting for nervous Democrats to chill the f out. Would I have preferred he beat the hell out of them now? Yes, but that is not his style.
though I am against selling across state lines generally, I see no reason if there are minimally accepted Federal standards why this would be a problem. Alone it would be a disaster, but with those standards can potentially safe a lot of money if insurance companies that are hq'ed in low overhead areas could then pass some of those savings to consumers. And I got nothing against tort reform or a tax credit if it will some repubs aboard.
I can imagine what Obama is thinking, he is waiting for nervous Democrats to chill the f out. Would I have preferred he beat the hell out of them now? Yes, but that is not his style.
Brooks is great, and a weathervane. Disregard him at your peril.
Democrats need to learn how to be more democratic. It is a long-running travesty that they call themselves the "Democratic" Party while consistently ignoring and/or demeaning the demos. As a tribe, Democrats are dysfunctional and introverted. The one inescapable lesson from the last several decades is that the worst thing that can happen to a Democrat in the White House is to have Democrats controlling Congress.
If rhubarbs is listening, take note: we don't call it "The Imperial State Building". "Democratic Party" is a name, and the entire thing is a noun, not an adjective and a noun. The party is no more democratic than the Labo ... view full comment
Brooks is great, and a weathervane. Disregard him at your peril.
Democrats need to learn how to be more democratic. It is a long-running travesty that they call themselves the "Democratic" Party while consistently ignoring and/or demeaning the demos. As a tribe, Democrats are dysfunctional and introverted. The one inescapable lesson from the last several decades is that the worst thing that can happen to a Democrat in the White House is to have Democrats controlling Congress.
If rhubarbs is listening, take note: we don't call it "The Imperial State Building". "Democratic Party" is a name, and the entire thing is a noun, not an adjective and a noun. The party is no more democratic than the Labour Party in Britain is composed of proletarian laborers. It is currently the party of union magnates, movie stars, Wall Street bankers, university professors, and trial lawyers. The political malpractice on display in the healthcare debate is a sympton, not the disease.
Oh yeah, Brooks is a weathervane alright, whose specialty is poisoned cake. He delights in giving advice to the Democrats, and you can be pretty sure that, if Brooks suggests it, the best course of action is to do the opposite. I seem to recall that pretty much everything he had to say about the last presidential campaign turned out to be wrong. Go ahead, tell me any one thing that Brooks has ever said that, with hindsight, has turned out to be right. The man is a viper and a ninny to boot. No small accomplishment.
Oh yeah, Brooks is a weathervane alright, whose specialty is poisoned cake. He delights in giving advice to the Democrats, and you can be pretty sure that, if Brooks suggests it, the best course of action is to do the opposite. I seem to recall that pretty much everything he had to say about the last presidential campaign turned out to be wrong. Go ahead, tell me any one thing that Brooks has ever said that, with hindsight, has turned out to be right. The man is a viper and a ninny to boot. No small accomplishment.