Two nights ago, for the first time that I can remember, I watched a State of the Union Address with great interest . The entire thing—even the Republican response and post-speech commentary (well, I was cooking during parts…but still, pretty much the whole speech…).I guess it helps that I’m basically a Democrat pretending to be an independent and I’ve been an ardent Obama-supporter essentially since he became an Illinois Senator; regardless, over the past couple of years I’ve shied away from giving regular attention to the political arena due to my distaste for its polarizing, often hypocritical and wavering nature, and I readily recognize that Obama hasn’t exactly been a knock-out success during his first year in office—in fact, I believe he’s actually been incredibly disappointing.
Why is that? Well, I think one can attribute Obama’s less-than-stellar first quarter to a few things:
1. Obama has incredible rhetoric. Of course, I’ve known Obama is a great speaker for a while now, but it was apparent more than ever during the SotU address that he is a master spinster. This is good and bad: good because he can take any argument against him or his policy and spin and contort it as to make the criticizer look like a fool and an idiot, while at the same time making him appear to be a genius (the mark of a great debater); bad because when people break down and see past his fancy words, if there’s no evidence to back them up, he’s the one who looks like an idiot, spouting out empty statements. Last year Obama delivered a lot of big words—words that a lot of people, especially independents who voted for him, saw through very easily.
2. Those damn Republicans. Even though I cared nothing for politics when the last Democratic majority occupied Congress, I believe people when they say this is perhaps the most divided, bi-partisan Congress ever. Yes, I lean towards the left, but can open-minded right-wingers (an oxymoran?) really think the stubborn refusal of Republican representatives to participate in…well, anything, is not bad for everyone--liberals and conservatives alike? I don’t think I’ve ever witnessed such unbelievable naivety and childish behavior from a group of supposedly responsible adults, much less from the people that are supposed to help run the country. I mean damn. How fucking ignorant do you have to be to think this is in the best interest of anyone (but yourself)? And representing a state and a country should in theory be about as selfless as any job could be. I guess in this economy, even congressmen are worried about losing their jobs. Ironic isn’t it, how members of Congress believe the only way to keep their jobs in an election year is to not do them? Can any other job realistically make that claim? Just taking the opposite stance because your party dogma says you must is absolutely ridiculous. The Republican Party is starting to look an awful lot like the Catholic Church.
3. Lack of experience. I don’t think Obama completely knew what he was getting into when he stepped foot into the White House. And I’m not talking about the two wars or all of the other shit he’s inherited from the previous administration. I’m talking about the growing pains of dealing with a giant microscope hovering over his head held by the entire country and a historically stubborn Republican Party fighting his every action. To be fair though, I don’t think anyone—even the most seasoned of Washington vets—could have been completely prepared for this kind of onslaught.
Thankfully though, growing pains are apparently a pretty normal thing for newly elected presidents. Just ask Bill Clinton, who’s administration in now held in high regard (by most of the country). His first year…hell, his first term, I believe, was awful shaky, and he was held reasonable for the epic failure of his effort to tackle healthcare. In this respect, Obama might even have a heads up. Firstly, he has the advantage of history: eight years of the Clinton administration to draw from certainly helps, especially in regard to the healthcare debate. It appears, from his SotU address, that he will not give up or give in, which is a testament to his determination in face of mounting odds. Secondly, despite the lack of a 60-vote “filibuster-proof” majority in Congress, people still seem to forget Obama and the Democrats still have the greatest majority in decades. Yes, decades. It is quite refreshing that Obama seems to be adopting a “filibuster-be-damned, we’re gonna get shit done anyway” mentality.
And that is the kind of mentality that came through in his address the other night. While he again made a lot of promises and big statements, in which it remains to be seen to what degree he and Congress will follow through, the biggest thing I took out of his address was his refusal to back down in any regards. He was expected to take a more populist approach in order to help his image a bit and reconnect with a lot of the public, and that is very much what he did. However, in the face of this, Obama did not compromise his agenda: by issuing a challenge to the Republican Party to basically get off their high horse and get their hands dirty and by acknowledging that he will in fact not back down in the face of seemingly drastic set-backs to the healthcare plan, he firmly established that he will not be pushed around. I even found his historically uncharacteristic criticism of the Supreme Court verdict regarding campaign ad financing to be especially encouraging. One article I read made a good point in that he was not questioning the integrity of the court, so he had every right to criticize the decision. Separation of power does not mean the decisions of one branch cannot be brought into question by another, and Obama made that abundantly clear on Wednesday.
Of course, none of this matters if Obama doesn’t deliver. He made a lot of big promises the first time around, and the hopes of the nation (along with the added pressure from him being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize) set the bar very high. In most peoples’ minds—including mine—Obama did not deliver last year. However, it is encouraging to see that he hasn’t backed down. Unless he’s just incredibly talented at duping the American public over and over again with his words, I have hope that this year he will begin to deliver on some of those promises; this is the first time I’ve heard Obama mention specific steps in a significant speech to the public, which is certainly encouraging. Regardless, the trial and training period is over, if there is such a thing for a president. I believe a lot of his original supporters and even some of his skeptics have given him the benefit of the doubt this past year despite his shortcomings and the continuing stagnation of the economy, but now the margin for error is gone--especially with elections coming up this year and the loss of the filibuster-proof majority.
But Obama cannot do this alone, which he made quite clear: “To Democrats, Obama said ‘people expect us to solve problems, not run for the hills.’ To Republicans, he cautioned that ‘just saying no to everything may be good short-term politics, but it's not leadership.’” Today, he reiterated this directly to the GOP:
“The president told House Republicans that Americans don't ‘want us to focus on our job security. They want us to focus on their job security.
‘They didn't send us to Washington to fight each other in some sort of political field cage match to see who comes out alive. That's not what they want. They sent us to Washington to work together, to get things done and to solve the problems that they're grappling with every single day.’”
Damn straight. I need a job as bad as the next unlucky recent grad (if not worse than: how does $115k in student loans sound to you?). So it’s safe to say I’ll be keeping a close eye on Washington this year. Obama’s fantastic rhetoric has once again struck a chord with me and my hopes are raised greater than ever. Now let’s see those words put into action.
No comments:
Post a Comment