|
There are obviously many people posting on websites all over the Internet today who wouldn't be happy even if Rahm and Obama had accomplished miracles. In fact, the venom of quite a few posters indicates that that would have made them even more angry, because they'd have to figure out a way to blame the Democrats for success.
I have been looking closely at a number of presidencies, especially those from FDR forward. With historical perspective, it is often easy to see where a president and his staff went wrong. Now, not quite two years into Obama's time, some points are starting to emerge.
One thing they did, which was a follow on to the G.W. Bush administration had done in late '08, was to stave off a world wide financial collapse and to try to \"prime the pump\" of the economy with government programs. This question comes to mind: what would have happened if they had allowed the crisis to go forward and fully "ripen" into something like the Great Depression of the 1930s and 40s?
One likely result would have been an overwhelming public clamor to do SOMETHING, right then. Had the world financial system collapsed, there would be no question in anyone's mind that a serious response was required. The gloves, in other words, would have been off. You don’t scream “socialism” when you need a lifeboat. We might truly have moved into a post partisan phase where people finally concluded that we couldn’t afford to be at each other’s throats all the time.
While the near term results for the nation of a true meltdown would have been dire and unfortunate, it might have been a good thing for the country in the long term. Why? Our business practices, and our national wealth, have been increasingly moving toward outright fraud over the last three or four decades. A good part of the money that flows through the investment banks on Wall Street comes from fees and overcharging the bottom one third of consumers, those who can least afford it and who earn the least in salaries. Name any aspect of American business you care, from health care, to food production to car rentals to banking, and you can find the taint of misleading practices, overcharging, risk taking and even out right fraud in many cases. A true depression might have shaken much of this dishonesty out of our economy and forced business back to basics. Perhaps we would even become a better place to live with a more cooperative spirit.
To much of the American public, the bailouts looked like welfare for the rich while the bottom half of wage earners got zilch. On top of that, it looked like care and honesty in buying and paying for a house was actually being punished. These factors, along with the fear mongering by FOX News and Glen Beck, have led to the Tea Party movement.
The fact is that the Wall Street bailouts allowed big banks and investment houses to keep right on doing business the way they had before, with some minor changes. The benefits from more regulation that have been imposed on credit card companies and banks are something that most people either don't know exist or don't fully understand. There can be no doubt whatsoever that virtually none of those changes would have occurred with a Republican in the White House. This is simple fact, not political posturing.
The basic problem with the presidency is that too much comes at you too fast and very few people have any depth of experience in dealing with the flood of urgent issues. Obama and Rahm have managed to hold the country together financially and have put in place legislation that was proposed over decades. They are not a part of some conspiracy to remove freedom and individual choice from America. This kind of talk, which is everywhere these days, is silly and ultimately threatens to make those pushing it look like fools on a grand scale. In the main, Obama has reacted to events with moderation (too much in my view), which is one reason that the far right has to cook up conspiracy theories: he has given them too little to use against him.
We are likely to see a far different presidency with Rahm out the door and running for mayor of Chicago. I hope that Obama gains additional confidence in his own instincts and that the new chief of staff steers him toward ways that might please more centrist Americans. The posters on other forums make abundantly clear that pleasing the right is an impossibility.
Doug Terry 10.1.10
|
