Sam Bain, Columnist
Ideology: Conservative | Writing from: Ohio
Credit: Pete Souza/White House Flickr
Who is Barack Obama?
A few simple answers to that question is that he is the president, a Democrat, a leader; but when push comes to shove, do we really know who this man is; do we really know what he believes?
Sure, there is the conventional wisdom that suggests he is a very left wing liberal, and for the most part, he has delivered on that definition. Health care, the stimulus and more recently the DREAM Act are all examples of big government and outlandish liberal spending policies. Even throughout these actions, he has shown a side that is not necessarily liberal, but certainly not conservative either.
During every major event of his two-year presidency, Obama has not led, but only reacted to criticism. When the Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded, he did not meet with Tony Hayward or even visit the coast until after he was called out by James Carville and Spike Lee. When health-care reform was put forth, he let Congress run wild with it. The only leadership on his part was the day he signed in the bill. Even his beloved public option plan, the cornerstone of health-care reform that he had been championing for years, was lost in the political firestorm.
Countless times, Obama campaigned on letting the Bush tax cuts expire for the wealthiest Americans, only to falter on that promise and extend them for 24 months. While some conservatives are happy, his base is enraged. Never mind the fact that he has yet to close Guantanamo Bay or that DADT has been tossed to the way side, the tax deal was the cream of the crop.
As hard left as he is, the president is no longer just disappointing the right, but even more so the left. Just this week, the New York Times and Politico both published articles of possible primary challenges to Obama’s 2012 re-election bid. These rumors have been circulated before, but mostly due to Obama’s dipping approval ratings. Now they are resurfacing because of policy differences within the Democratic Party. It is not that president disagrees with his own party; he just feels it necessary to do what is politically expedient for him. If this includes sliding back and forth on issues to try and please whatever demographic or independent voters he may need, then so be it.
George W. Bush’s 2004 campaign was essentially run on the fact that much of the electorate disagreed with him, but they still knew who he was. “Whether you agree with me or not, you know where I stand” was a quote used by Bush over and over again. It reverberated with voters. They knew that in times of crisis and uncertainty that, at the very least, their president was a strong leader with a backbone of set values.
Initially during the immediate aftermath of the midterm elections, the pundits all had an opinion as to whether this president would remain on the hard left or move closer to the center as Clinton did. For those still in question, I would suggest not to expect either. Sure, he compromised a bit within the tax deal, but he also compared the GOP to hostage takers and said he was ready take on Republicans next year. It appears there is still some grit left to fight the opposition—depending on the current polls of course.
Continuing down this path of reacting and not leading is only going to anger everyone, eventually including the administration itself. The GOP whose power only resides in the House will have to battle with compromise for the sake of taking what they can get or doing their best to make Obama a one-term president. The left is angered enough already about what Obama has failed to do and they can only take so much more. Obama is failing to realize that his current trajectory of leadership will either land him a primary challenge or his own defeat come November 2012.
Politically speaking the Democratic Party really does not win here. For the nation as a whole, the turnout could be worse. Stable, unwavering and steadfast leadership is what is needed in a very volatile economy. The impulsive and unpredictable leadership style of the current administration has made a bad economy worse and ripped a tear in the fabric of America because whether you agree with the president or not, you don’t know where he stands.
Wow, it must be GOP talking points cut and paste time at the Ohio Kindergarten Sam studies at. Leadership? Like a kid who has never fought his way out of a paper bag would know…Are we still fighting in large numbers in Iraq, Poindexter? I know, I know, you wouldn’t know anything about being a young man taking fire in Iraq. Your a classic republican chickenhawk, safely ensconced behind your girlfriend’s skirt…IF you had a girlfriend. Was their fast action with the UPS bomb plot? Yes. Do unmanned aircraft still attack Al Queda in Pakistan? Yes. Volatile economy? No, Obama acted to right the ship, and now has to patiently wait for the jobs to follow…In the same manner President REAGAN did in 1983. I know, I know, understanding this would cause you to have to STUDY history and understand economic cycles instead of pasting talking points. Is it nap time yet, junior?
You know what makes your comment legitimate? How you personally attack the author the whole time and bring up no good facts to back your argument. It’s funny, you knock Bain for being a kindergartener but your name calling is straight off the elementary school playground. Not only that but you can’t figure out what their/there to use. Maybe you should STUDY a little English and grammar.
Nice try at the English poke, Mike. What exactly are “no good facts.” Maybe you need kindergarten also. I guess operations against AQ in Pakistan and the fact the economy IS improving don’t meet you world view of Obama, eh? You criticize me for personally attacking the author, yet his whole piece is an attack on Obama’s leadership? Please do tell what experience in leadership (beyond the usual college political organizing, i.e., not the real world) does the young author have? Save to say, he may have “led” in the cooking of fries and not a platoon of Marines in Helmut province.
Maybe the author can fill us in on all his qualifications which make him more suited then Obama. I bet silence is what we will get. So in the end, my point is valid about the author being a Repub Parrot, with no experience to back it up. Nice try Mike, I do know what makes my comment legitimate and so do you and the author.