In the Arena

Rich Poor

Frank Rich is a former theater critic. As such, he’s been a valuable observer of the histrionic trivialization of our national politics, the scandalous metastasizing of infotainment over substance. But he also has a tendency to see everything as theater, to overlook the details of policy on some difficult issues…like health care, for example. Today, in an unusually foolish column in which he posits Tiger Woods as the Person Of the Year, he offers this paragraph as his peroration:

This can be seen in the increasingly urgent political plight of Barack Obama. Though the American left and right don’t agree on much, they are both now coalescing around the suspicion that Obama’s brilliant presidential campaign was as hollow as Tiger’s public image — a marketing scam designed to camouflage either his covert anti-American radicalism (as the right sees it) or spineless timidity (as the left sees it). The truth may well be neither, but after a decade of being spun silly, Americans can’t be blamed for being cynical about any leader trying to sell anything. As we say goodbye to the year of Tiger Woods, it is the country, sad to say, that is left mired in a sand trap with no obvious way out.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but this is irresponsible crap–the sort of false equivalency that Rich has rightly criticized in the past. 

Rich is right that Americans have grown cynical. But the extremists of right and left have exploited that cynicism, have raised big money by distorting the truth, have denigrated the slow, tortuous compromise that is at the heart of progress in any real democracy. Obama’s is the least cynical of the seven presidencies I’ve covered. It is a presidency that took effective action to prevent a depression, that has refused to engage in arrogant jingoism in its dealing with the rest of the world and–most important–spent its political capital on the most important piece of social legislation, health care reform, of the past 45 years.

That Rich would even implicitly compare Barack Obama, who has made a significant and very substantive intellectual effort to deal with every problem he’s faced, with an adulterous golfer is facile to the point of slander…And so is the judgment that the country is “mired in a sand trap with no obvious way out.” From where I sit, the country is facing very difficult problems–caused, in large part, by the right-wing extremism Rich seems to be crediting here–but it is in much better shape than it was a year ago. And the way ahead seems very clear to me: After a thirty year period during which the very notion of governance was ridiculed, we need to take the work of government seriously again. Barack Obama is doing precisely that.

You can disagree with Obama’s decisions and his philosophy. You can argue that that he has tried to take on too much. You can argue that health care reform was the wrong priority in the midst of a deep recession.  But you cannot gainsay the intensely serious nature of this presidency. And to give any credit to the notion that Obama is “spineless” requires a fundamental lack of knowledge about what he has been trying to accomplish this year…and about the limits of the possible.

Yes, Americans have grown cynical. The most toxic form of that cynicism is the know-nothing populism that Rich is celebrating here. Frank Rich’s value as a columnist has always been his willingness to push back against the carnival tide of ignorance that has washed over the country in recent decades. Today, he lazily went with that tide.  At a moment when the real voices of progress and sanity need all the help they can get, that is a terrible mistake.

Related Topics: Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Audacity of Dope: Tales of a Toking Teenage Obama

    We knew Barack Obama smoked weed in high school because he wrote about it in his books. What we didn’t know until Buzzfeed posted these choice nuggets (I’m so sorry) from David Maraniss’s new book on the President’s younger years, is the giggle-worthy details of his “Choom Gang” lifestyle, which are right out of a buddy stoner flick. Obama and his friends drove around the lush Hawaii countryside, hot-boxing their VW bus and re-upping with a long-haired pizza-tossing dealer named Ray, who Obama thanked in his yearbook “for all the good times.”

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    Obama Stumbles? Why the President’s Right to Talk About Bain

    The meme of the day in journo-world is that President Obama has stumbled at the outset of the general election campaign. The evidence for this? Well, uh, there isn’t very much, really–except that a few Democrats have criticized his campaign’s attacks on Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital and that Obama’s fundraising is merely humongous, instead of obscenely humongous. The two phenomena are linked, of course: Obama isn’t getting the usual haul from Wall Street because he has outrageously–outrageously!–tried to regulate the bankers who did so much to crash the economy in 2008. The handful of Democrats squawking are people who either (a) get money from private equity firms or (b) have retired and joined Mondo Casino. But there is another side to this story:

  • octavian21

    Mr. Klein,

    This is perhaps the best view on Obama’s presidency I have read to date. Too bad it will be buried in the weekend swamp posting. Maybe you could expand this view into a full column? Although the most logical perspective it is very unique compared to the overkill from the left and right. It is clear that Obama does not have any ulterior motives or hidden agendas. Obama has been to and worked in our slums and neighborhoods in Chicago. He can relate to the unworthy and truly wants a better world for them. Some piece of mind for the low income families who suffer any time their child gets ill without health care.

    To the critics on the left I ask simply, what would you? How would you have proceeded without support from Lieberman and Nelson? Liberals wanted to punish Lieberman and Obama refused. Now that goodwill has paid off as Lieberman held the fate of Obama’s entire political capital and would probably given even stronger opposition to the bill.

  • gpanfile

    Unfortunate that Frank gave in to the temptation to Tigerize Obama… following in the footsteps of such illustrious and illuminating examples as Golf Digest.

    The extreme attitudes towards Obama from both left and right are symbolic of just how infantile the American public, or much of it, has allowed itself to become, in exchange for a small percentage of the profits therefrom. News flash… owning 10% of your own oppression isn’t a good deal.

    Obama is getting beat up from the left for such absurdities as NOT wanting to release photographs of our morons torturing their morons… which is good for the USA how??? And for not somehow imposing a perfect health care system by fiat, without the support of Congress… it’s absurd. On the other side you get the socialist birther conspiracy theory people who somehow feel this essentially middle class guy with a wife and two children can’t wait to invite the Soviets in or something.

    Reality is that fiscally and in terms of foreign policy, we are in a very deep hole thanks to the past eight years. And there is no way that some more purist application of the Bush theories is going to reverse their results. There is also no way that some purist left-wing laundry list is going to fix everything either. Besides, the probability of either being implemented is nil. Government is like home maintenance, it costs money to fix things, the perfect fix is often too expensive or nonexistent, and ideology has to give way to pragmatism. People are going to have to agree, and things are going to take time. Only children argue otherwise. And indeed, many chronologically young people have more common sense than so-called ‘adult’ ideologues.

    The good news here is that as usual, in his b-ball style, Obama is playing to the clock. The next milestone will be in the fall of ’10 and he has eight months or so to prepare for that. The one after is in the fall of ’12 and he has two years and eight months. It says here he doesn’t mind falling behind a few points in the third quarter… it’s all about who is winning when the buzzer sounds, and ain’t nobody beat him yet.

  • mfritter

    I agree with the above poster. Obama is the most intellectually serious major US politician I’ve ever seen and I’m in my 60s. It is idiotic for the Left to criticize him when the problem is almost entirely with the Senate rules about which he can do nothing. It’s also absurd to criticize the Democratic Party. If we could govern with a 51% Senate majority, we on the Left would be very happy indeed.

    The Left needs to read its Nate Silver and do the grass roots work needed to build better Senators.

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    As I watch watching the health care threads unfold over the weekend I was struck by a thought. How many of us as we pondered the world as it existed in December 2004 could gave possibly forseen what the world would look like right now?

    Say what you will about anything – the world is a significantly safer and saner place now than it was then.

    It’s very easy to forget.

  • mfritter

    I want moderate my above comment a little. Obama should be criticized where he’s wrong. Of course. But he deserves our whole-hearted support in many, many areas.

  • kristiia

    You are right, Joe. I’m dismayed by the people on the left side who are so willing to start pushing the RW meme’s.

    The lack of perspective and unwillingness to acknowledge the spectrum and difficulty of corralling the 60 Senators necessary to pass HCR makes part of the “Reality-based Community” less then honest or realistic.

  • http://ktheintz.wordpress.com/ kth

    This week’s lefty meme seems to be to find common ground with the teabaggers. But a far sounder heuristic is to assume that the teabaggers are wrong about everything, even when, as in the case of the bank bailouts, one is tempted to agree with them. Because they are indeed wrong about everything (disgusting as the bailed-out, unrepentant fatcats are, allowing our financial system to seize up would have been a far greater evil).

  • Jim, Foolish Literalist

    When I saw from the headline that Rich was talking about Tiger Woods, I decided to skip the column. (I don’t even want to hear any more jokes about Woods. I don’t freakin’ care.) That Rich went to the lazy (and I’m being polite) Tiger-Obama comparison is disappointing, to put it mildly. You expect this kind of crap from MoDo, who phones in about 70% of her columns these days, but honestly, is there no editor at the NYT to take Rich aside and pointed out how stupid this was?

  • mni08

    “foolish” is too strong a word to use, to critic a guy column that you disagree with; It distract from the point you are trying to make.

  • tstar3

    Exactly Joe. It’s not for nothing that of the last 40 or so years only two presidents have been democrats. It’s because, come hell or highwater, the Republicans support their own and they would rather their own in charge (who they agree with on 70% of the issues) than a dem who they agree with on 3% of the issues.

    The Dems can’t get enough of shooting themselves in the foot, face, or wherever else.

  • gargi20

    Thank you Mr Klein
    I’ve read books by Frank Rich (The Greatest Story Ever Told) and by Glen Greenwald ( The Great American Hypocrites ) and have been an avid reader of their online columns for sometime now.
    However, I’ve become increasingly dismayed by the constant carping and negativity I find there these days. Its like they’ve lost all perspective of the world as it is ( as opposed to their Liberal version of an Utopian fantasy!)

    The President has to work within the limits of a democratic governance. The country is (sadly) NOT as liberal as Rich and Greenwald imagine it to be and Obama cannot deliver beyond what is broadly acceptable to the majority.

    I’m reading Carl Bernstein’s biography of Hillary Clinton, and the contrast between Obama’s first year and that of Clinton is stark. Clinton’s first year was a train wreck as compared to Obamas.
    Bernstein has devoted several chapters to Hillary’s healthcare effort and its given me a new respect for what this administration has been able to achieve. They’ve avoided every mistake Clinton made (in her healthcare Bill) and have delivered a bill, imperfect though it may be in some ways, which has passed the House and almost passed the Senate. This is nothing short of amazing – given the politics of the day.

    I like and agree with this line of yours especially
    “But the extremists of right and left have exploited that cynicism, have raised big money by distorting the truth, have denigrated the slow, tortuous compromise that is at the heart of progress in any real democracy.”

    Yes, compromise is tortuous and sometimes heartbreaking, but at times its the only path to where you want to go.

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    “foolish” is too strong a word to use…

    Nonsense. There’s no shortage of foolishness on the Op-ed pages of the WaPo or NYT. Failure to call it such when it appears is not merely foolish but downright dangerous.

  • 53_3

    I have been very critical of Obama’s innate fear of the filibuster, but one of the outcomes is more than adequately described in your comments.
    .
    As a historical backup to your comments, others should consider this question:
    .
    Just how many pieces of legislation in the past have been passed by margins of 60 or more votes?

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    Can we dispense with the word extremists? It’s highly misleading on several levels. The basic problem is that is has two separate meanings that are routinely conflated.

    Does is mean someone’s who’s views fall at the edge of a continuim that’s been created to try and ‘measure’ political belief? Or does it mean an unwillingness to compromise on wherever those beliefs happen to fall and marginalize those who disagree?

    As it happens, there’s no shortage of ‘centrist’ extremists. The op-ed columns are full of examples.

  • constantweader

    Frank Rich is one of the finest writers in the U.S. One does not have to agree with every colomn — in fact I don’t agree with this one, either — to refrain from charging him with putting out “irresponsible crap,” a word choice I’m sure you would have made stronger were this not a family magazine.

    There is something essentially wrong with a writer who has to resort to quasi-profanity to express disagreement with the opinion of another writer. Tell the boss to give you some time off, Joe, because you’re really losing it, & you’re bad for the brand.

    The Constant Weader at http://www.RealityChex.com

  • Art Pepper

    Couldn’t agree more.

    Heck, the new direction at the EPA is reason enough to thank our lucky stars that a Democrat was elected in ’08.

    The Left needs to push back strongly on issues where is disagrees with the administration. But that’s not a reason to practice our own version of the “false equivalency” game.

  • jastdi2

    Frankly, I am in complete agreement with Rich. Obama promised much to get elected and began falling off his promises from Day One. I think the adjective, “spineless” has, over time, come to be about right. You appear satisfied with any “Health ‘Reform’ Bill” of some sort; a Climate Bill of some sort. Transparency, civil liberties, etc.: all sold out, the litany is well-known. Obama will take what’s easy, not what he campaigned on. Breaking sweat on these issues is not cool and not his style. His is not the method of a man with spine. I cannot understand your continued shrill screeds in support of this limp leadership operation (or, frankly, Time’s allowing you such a continuing Johnny-One-Note platform). It is not as if Bush is waiting in the weeds to replace him next week if Obama’s disappointed followers start calling him on his multiple failures of leadership.

  • http://www.ghostnote.com Cookie Puss

    Intra-mural Village squabbling. Gonna take me a while to get over this.

    Okay, all better.

  • homerhk

    Spot on JK. You only have to go read some of the comments at politico these days to see how fevered the right are about Obama – or just go read the Corner at National Review sometime.

    I mean does anyone stand back to see why this guy is being accused of government takeovers, socialism etc by the right and corporate love-in, sellout to the right, unbearable centrism by the left?

  • gargi20

    Did you seriously expect him (or Hillary or Edwards for that matter) to deliver on all the campaign promises he made? Has any candidate in history ever done that ?

    Campaign promises are easy to make. But to translate them into effective legislation, he has to take into account the likes of Leiberman and Ben Nelson and Stupak and Landrieu, not to mention the completely obstructionist opposition party.

    How do you propose. for instance, he reach the magic filibuster proof number of votes he requires without any compromise? I doubt senators like Leiberman and Nelson can be arm twisted. who knows what motivates them.The best of political analysts have failed to come up with a reasonable explanation for their contrariness and have set it down (at least in Joe’s case) to plain, old fashioned spite.
    Blame it on the flawed system if you will – where a handful of Senators representing small constituencies can flout the majority in their party with impunity.

  • homerhk

    Notwithstanding all of that gargi, he has, in fact, kept a surprising amount of his campaign promises. The only area where he has changed in a majorly substantive way is in the realm of civil liberties and state secrets. Domestically, he is pushing forward with most of the things that he promised he would do.

    He also promised that he would take ideas from anywhere, wouldn’t be ideologicially rigid at the expense of getting something done and would change the tone of politics – something which I believe he really has done – as JK says, this is probably the least cynical Presidency in a long time.

  • Exiled_At_Home (formerly Neo)

    Frank Rich’s column is spot on. However, why are you writing such irresponsible crap, Joe Klein. What, precisely, is irresponsible about the following view:
    ~
    Though the American left and right don’t agree on much, they are both now coalescing around the suspicion that Obama’s brilliant presidential campaign was as hollow as Tiger’s public image — a marketing scam designed to camouflage either his covert anti-American radicalism (as the right sees it) or spineless timidity (as the left sees it). The truth may well be neither

  • kathy

    Right you are, Paul, and it’s the reason I, too, think we need to support this President as much as possible. Our best hope lies in getting him as much Congressional support as possible.

  • gargi20

    @homerhk – I agree. Seems surprising to me that the pure blood liberals – the ones who’re so disillusioned now – probably havent read his “Audacity Of Hope” in which he mentions time and again the need to seek common ground in framing policy.

  • apr2563

    Joe: You may disagree with the assessment of President Obama. However, you did not mention the reason for Time naming Bernake as “Man of the Year” and the misreading of so many of the events of this decade. That was the main point of the article.
    The worst mistakes were made by Bernake, those who supported the Iraq war, and the lack of understanding of the motives and actions of the Bush administration. As far as I am concerned, the press are most to blame. The financial press was so enthralled by corporate America, few saw what was so obvious. The political press did not investigate the corruption and hubris of the Bush/Cheney reign (except the McClatchy press and few others). Judy Miller was the prototype reporter leading up to the war with Iraq. Wow, what a great story a war offers to the fourth estate!
    We may have rid ourselves of the Bush/Cheney administration but not the debris they left behind. We still have the same pundits and “experts” that were so often wrong over the last decade leading us into the next 10 years. Friedman: “All we need is 6 more months”. Leading to the famous FU (Friedman Unit).
    It has often the “dirty hippies” on the left blogosphere that have been correct. This has caused the Villagers much disdain. It is so hard for them to admit they are wrong and what damage their procostinations have cause.

  • kathy

    ” But you cannot gainsay the intensely serious nature of this presidency. And to give any credit to the notion that Obama is “spineless” requires a fundamental lack of knowledge about what he has been trying to accomplish this year…and about the limits of the possible.”

    It has been such a relief to see how little apparent attention Obama pays to the “sky is falling” contingent of either party or the media. Few see the irony of assuming that next November will be solely determined by today, just as they were wrong to assume a year ago that today would be a breeze because of the election.

    What Obama’s campaign demonstrated is that this is a person who knows how to look ahead and plan for lots of possibilities, and does not panic when his followers do.

  • homerhk

    From a personal perspective I couldn’t agree more. I do worry that ultimately the media will eat him.

  • Ivy_B

    Very well said, kathy. While I have been disappointed in some of the things he has done, I have not been surprised by many because he said so much of what he would do during the campaign.
    .
    Also during the campaign, I remember wanting him to do something or respond to something the McCain campaign said and ultimately his patience was the correct approach.
    .
    Even when I disagree, I am so pleased to have someone whose intelligence I respect in the office.

  • Paul-no not that one

    I think Joe willfully missed the point of the column, which was about Americans being cynical after being burned so many times.

    Of course Rich lists things such Iraq war encouragers (like Joe) and TIME magazine celebrating Ben Bernanke as examples.

    I suggest that Klein’s reading of the column is facile (see others can stuff that word into criticisms too)

  • formerlyjames

    I read the Rich article and didn’t find any conclusions about Obama. He presented what some right and left wingers are coalescing over based on the cynicism to which he had devoted the whole of the article. If I found fault, it would be using Woods as a jumping off point as I find it a stretch to apply that to Enron and all of his other examples. I don’t seek anything from entertainers other than entertainment. Not even closely related to what I expect from business and political leaders.

  • formerlyjames

    PNNTO, great minds think alike. You beat me to the post as I was writing…

  • Paul-no not that one

    fj your criticism is better written and with a nicer tone.

  • apr2563

    Agreed Paul. Willfully misinterpreting the Rich article is what Joe did. As I stated earlier, Rich was stating how cynical everyone is after the bamboozlement of the last decade. Rightfully so. And, he is making the point of how this cynicism has affected the Obama administration.
    Of course, Joe was part of the bamboozlement and his magazine continues the charade. Bernake. This is too hard for Joe to admit. If he did, he would lose his pundit cred with the Villagers.
    If he admitted mistakes, he might not have the opportunity to appear with Chris Matthews, CNN, etc.
    His centerism might be challenged. He and Matthews have such disregard for those lazy hippy bloggers. The bloggers, of course, raised $115,000,000 for the Dems. They went all over the country campaigning, sacrificing money, family life, and jobs.
    Joe, loves the wisdom of the often wrong but never accountable Politico and probably has no idea of the resume of the main bloggers on Daily Kos, for instance. Politico is part of the echo chamber he reveres.

  • http://melissasouza.wordpress.com melissasouza

    Thanks once again Joe. I began blogging at the beginning of this year and registered with several sites, including this one. It has been quite gut-wrenching to watch the tide turn against Obama, from adulation to almost incessant pilloring from the liberal blogosphere. The Huffington Post is a case in point: the blog has moved from an Obama love-fest at the turn of this year to incessant, sensationalist anti-Obama headlines almost everyday. I have been part of the dwindling number of passionate Obama advocates arguing for reason and patience on these blogs, with little success. I hope that you continue with your columns, heck, even write a full-blown report in answer to this anti-Obama “we’re disappointed that he’s no messiah” ranting and raving. Luckily, many bloggers supportive of Obama, on the Left, such as Ezra Klein, Jon Cohn, John Marshall, Matthew Yglesias and others have continued their support and vigorous defense of the President as well, especially during this crucial health care fight, where compromise has been excruciating but highly necessary in coming close to reform. It is more difficult for Democrats to govern precisely because they form such a big tent. The liberal base is just a chunk of the Democratic Party, and has to co-ed with the Joe Liebermans and the Kent Conrads and the Ben Nelsons. The Republican Party, on the other hand, has BECOME its base; this is why it is so easy for them to form a unified wall of “no” against Obama’s every initiative. This is why their leadership can show up and even lead Tea Party and Birther gatherings (this would be the equivalent of Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid showling up in support of a Code Pink rally). The Republican Party has been an effective nemesis precisely because it is so small. We will have to constantly deal with the disillusionment of the Left, who is never satisfied with anything less than Utopia. The political challenge is how the leaders of our Party, including opinion makers such as yourself, navigate these tortuous waters toward unity.

  • cfukara

    ” .. compare Barack Obama… with an adulterous golfer ,,”

    Why do I get the impression that ayatollah JK may as well decree that Tiger be stoned to death for his abominable transgressions?

    Should we believe that JK is not, nor has he ever been adulterous?
    Or is he one of the many pious American adulterers who publicly excoriate adulterers until they are caught in the act?

    —————
    So, public sentiment in USA is strong against infidelity – with eight out of ten of Americans disapproving ..

    The hypocrites! Consider those who are willing to admit it in a poll,
    ” .. 80 percent of women (compared to 98 percent of men) have frequent fantasies involving persons other than their partner …
    More than 50 percent of all married women (and a higher percentage of all married men), at some point, cheat on their mates.. at least one partner will have an affair in approximately 80 percent of all marriages.”

    By the way, since we have demonized the word “adultery” [bad], let us call it “extramarital affair” [neutral].
    ” .. 61 percent of Americans thought adultery should not be a crime in the United states; 35 percent thought it should;..”

  • umeshgeeta

    Brilliant. Joe you have enough Journalistic Capital under your belt to take Frank Rich for task here.

    I love Frank Rich columns but after reading those for years, I kind of sense when it is starting on a right foot or not. This particular one, it was very clear from the start that it was going down the gutters and not worth anything.

    The problem with Rich is he thinks good column is like a brilliant act on drama stage or some kind ephemeral song belted out by a Diva – it works or does not work. He treats politically commentary too much as a ‘free art form’ – let us try to throw something on the canvas and see if it sticks or not and see if that pattern looks great or not….

    “One may disagree with Obama, but one should undermine the seriousness with which he is attempting to solve the problems” – perfect Klein, you are on dot.

    Frank needs to see the cries which are going on Huffington Post, the daggers which are out on Daily Kos and the new Opposition Leader in the town – Howard Dean – who is ripping apart Health Care Reform policy. You are right Joe, that is called ‘spending political Capital’.

    The guy comes after 19 hours of begging with Developing Nations and this country has nothing but daggers awaiting for him. The ‘intra-mural’ fighting which has irrupted within Democratic Party is surreal. It is unbelievable, that the political forces which just a year back were ready to die for Obama are now looking for ways to kill all his policy initiatives for some simplistic ‘ideological / dogmatic’ demands.

    What does Rich think ‘spending Political Capital then’?

    It is all right to hold Obama’s feet for his lenient treatment of Bankers and Wall Street. But to even think his would be policy equivalence with disgraced Tiger Woods; Rich is going into uncharted territories with essentially undermining of notion called ‘Democratic America’.

  • umeshgeeta

    “One may disagree with Obama, but one should undermine the seriousness with which he is attempting to solve the problems” -

    I meant to say “one should NOT undermine the seriousness”

  • apr2563

    Melissa, as a member of the left I agree with much of what you wrote. I have lived too long to be an idealist. My word, as an adult, I witnessed the 60s. 1968 was enought to break any hopes I had for Utopia.
    However, I wish the Democrats would not cave immediately. When they speak of compromise, it takes 2 sides to reach a compromise. The Dems ceded from the beginning by not allowing single payer to be discussed, by letting the blue dogs take the initiative, by avoiding a strong endorsement of a public option. There was no compromise. It was a lay down from the start. They ceded to fear. They had a majority supporting a public option but did not use that to strongly fight for their plan. They let the teabaggers dominate the news for over a month. They never sent anyone out to challenge them and let people know who financed the astroturf movement
    What they did was placate the right and marginalize themselves.
    I will support the current bill and continue to vote Democratic. There is no other choice.

  • apr2563

    Sorry, but you are not understanding the Rich analogy. He is not comparing Tiger Wood and Obama. He is stating what has made us cynical and what has made it more difficult for Obama.

  • Paul-no not that one

    It’s pretty clear who has read Rich’s column and who has read what JK says the column says.

  • http://melissasouza.wordpress.com melissasouza

    To apr2563:
    I agree with you apr, maybe there should have been more of a fight against the opposition and a greater push for a much stronger bill, with a robust public option. I sincerely think it was Obama’s intention to fight for one, once the Bill moved into Conference. The problem is that the President and his team didn’t expect us to be where we are at this moment, still waiting for the Senate to pass its version BEFORE moving into Conference. Remember, Obama wanted to sign a complete Bill by Thanksgiving. If this process had moved faster, if the Senate hadn’t stalled in moving this legislation forward, the President would have had much more time and wiggle-room to play for a stronger bill with a public option. I think the White House underestimated the degree and effectiveness of the opposition; they, and the pro-reform movement in general, got caught off guard by the organized town-hall circus which dominated the media. Even before that, they let an attempt at bi-partisanship, when Charles Grassley and Mike Enzi were “participating” in the finance committee, just drag on without results which set the stage for the summer screaming. Yes, there were many unpredictable factors and unknown unknowns that happened, unanticipated by the White House and its allies which stalled the process, making it increasingly difficult to bargain on some issues important to the Left. This was not some diabolical intent on the part of the President to cave; it was just human error, the element of surprise and the unexpected, which dominate human events. Nevertheless, we have a Bill, and the fight is only just beginning with its passage.

  • sacredh

    I also agree. Obama is a liberal that ran as a centrist. I’m personally disappointed that he isn’t more liberal, but I also don’t want to see him become a one term president. I felt before the election that I’d be satisfied if he was able to accomplish 1/4 to 1/3 of his campaign promises. I’d vote for him again in a minute. The way I look at it, restoring respect for the US during his 1st year was a major accomplisment. Everything else has been gravy. His efforts on the economy have been much better than I’d thought was possible. Times are bad now. They could have been disasterous. Some of his economic decisions have been questionable. Relying on tax cuts like McCain proposed was laughable. We dodged a bullet a year ago.

  • sacredh

    That should have been in response to comments 2 and 3.

  • cfukara

    ” .. I am so pleased to have someone whose intelligence I respect in the office…”

    “intelligence”? “respect”?

    And you would proclaim as much – to the mothers whose kids and breadwinners are lost in a cruise missile or drone attack on a village or wedding procession …

    While speechmaking and affected (virtual) intellectualizing are nice, actions matter even more. Can we discern a radical shift in BHO’s actions after he assumed office in areas such as
    - law and order?
    - Or accountability in DoJ?
    - Or with regard to torture, renditions, detainees or in general, crimes against humanity?
    - Or with regard to our freedoms and transparency in government?
    Or should we claim that during his one year in office he is responsible for wreaking less terror and less gratuitous death on civilians in violent aggression in fewer sovereign countries (including Somalia, Yemen, Pakistan, Afghanistan ..)?
    Probably not.

    The following incident is revealing: He was expected to goive a seminal speech on the pursuit of world peace – for a cool $1.4 miilion. Instead BHO chose to promote gratuitous warmongering the world over – and took the money too.

  • jcapan

    “But the extremists of right and left have exploited that cynicism, have raised big money by distorting the truth, have denigrated the slow, tortuous compromise that is at the heart of progress in any real democracy”

    In Joe’s world Howard Dean = Glenn Beck. In Joe’s world, the center must hold or chaos will reign. And what is chaos, pray tell, ah, it appears to be populism, a democracy defined by bottom-up power, not elite led top-down authority.

    “The most toxic form of that cynicism is the know-nothing populism that Rich is celebrating here. Frank Rich’s value as a columnist has always been his willingness to push back against the carnival tide of ignorance that has washed over the country in recent decades. Today, he lazily went with that tide.”

    Oh, I see, the know nothing populism, the ignorant who disagree with his corporatist (i.e. centrist) vision of America. Rich who is otherwise brilliant, hereby disagrees with Joe’s esteemed (by himself) opinion and is therefore stupid. Maybe it’s Joe who needs a censor?

    As his fav military hating blogger said the other day:

    “objections over the mandate are largely identical — it’s a coerced gift to the private health insurance industry that underwrites the Democratic Party. The same was true over opposition to the bailout, objections to lobbying influence over Washington, and most of all, the growing anger that Washington serves the interests of financial elites at the expense of the working class.”

    “Whether you call it “a government takeover of the private sector” or a “private sector takeover of government,” it’s the same thing: a merger of government power and corporate interests which benefits both of the merged entities (the party in power and the corporations) at everyone else’s expense. Growing anger over that is rooted far more in an insider/outsider dichotomy over who controls Washington than it is in the standard conservative/liberal ideological splits from the 1990s. It’s true that the people who are angry enough to attend tea parties are being exploited and misled by GOP operatives and right-wing polemicists, but many of their grievances about how Washington is ignoring their interests are valid, and the Democratic Party has no answers for them because it’s dependent upon and supportive of that corporatist model. That’s why they turn to Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh; what could a Democratic Party dependent upon corporate funding and subservient to its interests possibly have to say to populist anger?”

    http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/

    What terrifies Joe’s estab, and sadly Obama’s too, is such coalescence. It may appear to be chaos, but by embracing the chaos America just might be reborn, gasp, as a functioning democracy, one that addresses its citizens’ needs.

  • apollyon07

    Is it just me or do half of Joe Klein’s posts stem from another journalist saying something that he doesn’t like?

  • stuartzechman

    Oregon JC:
    .
    The analysis in here in support of Joe for the most part has been so shallow, cliche-ridden and lazy that I can’t even be bothered to refute it.
    .
    That, and that I have less than zero respect for Frank Rich’s superficiality and ignorance.
    .
    But thanks for taking on Joe’s more obvious silliness.

  • jcapan

    SZ,
    .
    I figured you must have been too beleagured to enter this toxic fray.
    .
    A la Obama’s fo-po, when the neocons are giving each other reach-arounds in praise, you know something’s amiss, here we have a lot of committed dems defending Joe (b/c, naturally, he’s defending our fearless leader) from the dirty left. Something about bedfellows springs to mind…
    .
    I always say we worship our leaders like our gods–both demand of us faith in the unproven. All they require are our projections.
    .
    And in the event it wasn’t clear, in no way was I saying Rich is brilliant–from Joe’s perspective was my pt. He’s brilliant except when he disagrees with me. Rich is a facile villager only slightly more attuned to the street. Joe’s hubris is so overwhelming that short of a Larry Craig comeupponce, I fear for his immortal soul.

  • joellongview

    Joe – I’ve been following your columns with appreciation for a few years now but have never commented until this post. Thanks for your smart analysis and for calling out Rich’s comments for what they are – BS. I too have tremendous respect for his writing (although I find it to be a bit verbose, even pompous, at times), but I was upset and a little depressed after reading his editorial this morning. I was so glad to have found your eloquent answer to him – I only wish your post here had as many legs as a column on the illustrious Times.. I’ll forward this to as many friends and family as I can!
    -Matt

  • michaelfury
  • Paul-no not that one

    Sprezzatura makes a good point.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    It’s funny to see the extremists, who call themselves “moderates” and who refuse to allow the Left to have any voice in health care, now resorting to name calling because the Left wants nothing to do with their bill. Meanwhile, these same principle free moderates are holding out for their next bribe, like common street hookers. They have no business judging anyone.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    When you see the kind of bribery and deal making that is going on the public option must be the only thing that is not going to be in the final bill. Special treatment for Red states — those states that complain the loudest about “government” — to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars, no problem, but God forbid a mechanism for lowering costs be put in place. It must be the only thing that is being completely stopped in this bill. Lowering costs is a radical left wing and right wing idea, that moderates, like Nelson, Lieberman, and every member of the Senate, are opposed to. In fact, they will kill the bill if a cost saving mechanism is put in place. In fact, they are beside themselves with anger, at the very idea that anyone would be in support of cost savings.

  • lcmmd1

    Yes, I agree that Mr. Klein has misread the article. Or perhaps he just thought it ill-timed, being on the verge of an historic vote on health care reform.

    But does Rich have a bigger responsibility to the President or to his readers?

    Ill-timed or not, irresponsible or not, I was neither encouraged nor discouraged by Rich’s column. Health care reform will pass and America will be the better for it. And I see nothing wrong with pointing out that we have a right, maybe an ill-timed one, to be a little weary of what our legislators are trying to sell us.

    And, I need to add, I enthusiastically voted for Obama and would do so again.

  • behaviorist1

    Thank you, Joe. I usually like Frank Rich. It’s so easy to shoot from the left and shoot from the right, but the really difficult shot is from the middle where the reality is. We are very fortunate to have Barack Obama making the hard calls in these troubled times.

  • andrewtipton

    In the end, I voted for Barrack Obama not because he espoused everything I stood for ( which he does not ) , nor because he was a refreshing rebound from the mortifying, stolen eight years ( which he is, still ) but because I trusted his native intellect and ability to see nuanced possibilties.

    In short, we elect judgment and temperament more than all else ( see John McCain ). Their results will be the basis upon which he is returned or not. If our electorate is paying attention it should be a landslide.

    Has ANYone stopped for a moment to consider that the very outrage they are feeling is a result of a more-open and transparent thought process on display than any I have seen in my lifetime? That he is willing to put the mess front and center says two things: one, he trusts us to correctly judge his results in the long term; and, two, perhaps our nausea and disillusionment with the broken-ness of our current system of campaign financing and law-making that this process has laid bare will force us to do something concrete about THAT as well in the long run ?

    Imagine that! Public Financing of Elections. No Private monies allowed. If it were to ever happen, we’d have a Public Option inside of 4 years. But I digress.

    He may have been enamoured of his own cleverness in allowing all legislation on health care to originate in Congress, given the Clinton debacle. That speaks to his rather-naive overtures on behalf of bi-partisanship ( another promise attempted to be kept ). But he lost a golden opportunity, early in the process to just take the bull by the horns and set the agenda before the Right could react. I think this was, in the end, a huge strategic error — his own Bay of Pigs of sorts from which he can yet recover.

    I am an unabashed left-winger on social issues and centrist on fiscal matters. I never once expected a public option to come to pass this year or next. Not in the face of unprecedented financial disaster that preceded his entry into the office. We should be grateful that GDP is already climbing back. It would not have been thus otherwise.

    What ever became of the notion of patience? One thing at a time, one step at a time, one meal at a time . .. .

    The Lieber-Spite has other names and roots which we may never venture to accurately identify. The Full-Nelson so brazenly exhibited should be remembered in 2010 and 2012 and 2014. But then, I guess his “constituency” told him that Blackmail was ok with them. There is a special place in Purgatory for these guys. Right there with Merck, Aetna and Tiger Woods. There is no Hell except the ones we create right here on Earth.

  • behaviorist1

    And, furthermore, politics is the art of the possible. Barack is an artiste! Thanks again, Joe.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    The problem with real liberals, unlike any who are currently in the Senate, is they refuse to be bribed. They are opposed to most forms of moral degeneracy. They also have a problem obstructing the will of the majority of citizens, just so they can get their own way. In other words, their biggest problem is they are not just like “centrists” and other moral compromisers.

  • andrewtipton

    And besides, God forgives all if we truly repent. I suspect that George Bush will one day ask forgiveness. Dick Cheney never will.

  • palininatowel

    Joe,

    Frank Rich not only can write circles around you, he also can out-think you in terms of politics and policy.

    I love how you snidely put him down as a “former theater critic.”

    You need to step outside your narrow existence, Joe. Frank Rich seems to have a much fuller picture of America than you do. That makes his observations on politics and policy far more accurate than your claustrophobic Beltway musings.

  • palininatowel

    Joe doesn’t use asterisks when he insults.
    .
    You should know that.

  • palininatowel

    It’s called “cherry-picking,” Paul.
    .
    Joe wants to take on yet another despised “liberal” (and a fellow columnist, to boot) so he cherry-picks one graph out of a lengthy piece that highlights everything from the deceit that led us into the Iraq war (cheerleaded by none other than Joe Klein) to the abject phoniness of “reality” TV.
    .
    Yet here’s Joe, covering his sorry ass yet again, by proving that the calm, rational centrists know how the world really works while everyone else is just a poo-flinging third grader.
    .
    Frank Rich is not only a far superior writer than Joe, he;s also a far superior thinker., as anyone who bothers to read Rich’s entire piece — rather than Joe’s cherry-picked paragraph — would clearly see.

  • palininatowel

    Please, don’t stop Joe when he sees a chance to slap a rival columnist.
    .
    So much insecurity, so little time.

  • palininatowel

    A simple suggestion for all reading this piece by Joe…

    Go read the entire Frank Rich piece and see if Rich is saying what Joe claims he is saying.

    You may find that Joe is not being honest here.

  • mzha4u

    How easy it is to forget that the Democratic party of congress had the majority over the Bush years. How easy it is to forget that Bill Clinton stole trillions from our now almost bankrupt social security system to “balance the budjet”. When Clinton was in office, the republicans had the majority. Now we have radicals in this administration, we are on the path to socialism. Terriorists have more rights than they should, considering how they have killed thousands of innocent people. Other countries are walking all over us and laughing in our faces. Radicals corrupting our country are not answering to their crimes. What is wrong with this picture

  • freeinpa

    “Say what you will about anything – the world is a significantly safer and saner place now than it was then”

    A comment that ranks up there with Obama’s self-grade of B+.

    The only proof of your statement will be a review of history not a wish of today.

  • freeinpa

    Frank Rich is a former theater critic and current political clown. The NYT op-ed page has become “all the news to line a bird cage”.

  • http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/12/links-2009-12-21.html Links: 2009-12-21 – Credit Writedowns

    [...] Rich Poor – Swampland – TIME.com (I liked Frank Rich’s column and found much to agree with in his analysis. I find this response facile in its intemperate indignation.) [...]

  • http://williamtozier.com/slurry/2009/12/26/links-for-2009-12-25 Notional Slurry » links for 2009-12-25

    [...] Rich Poor – Swampland – TIME.com "Rich is right that Americans have grown cynical. But the extremists of right and left have exploited that cynicism, have raised big money by distorting the truth, have denigrated the slow, tortuous compromise that is at the heart of progress in any real democracy. Obama's is the least cynical of the seven presidencies I've covered. It is a presidency that took effective action to prevent a depression, that has refused to engage in arrogant jingoism in its dealing with the rest of the world and–most important–spent its political capital on the most important piece of social legislation, health care reform, of the past 45 years." (tags: politics criticism presidency media polarization) [...]

blog comments powered by Disqus