Sunday, May 17, 2009

With Obama’s daunting agenda he needs as few distractions as possible

President Obama’s first 100 days in office may be the most drastic in American history. Obama used the economic panic as a jumping off point to actualize plans to fix nearly all of America’s problems, from healthcare to education to restructuring the economy, no stone (or industry) was left unturned. Obama enacted his grandiose vision with the thinking that for America to get back on track all of its problems must be fixed, to avoid a “death by a thousand paper cuts” type scenario, fair enough. Despite the monumental undertaking, to tackle problems that have been floating around the Congressional floor for decades, see healthcare and entitlement reform, the President would be wise to limit his distractions.

Earlier this week, Obama reneged on his decision to release pictures of American soldiers ‘torturing/enhanced interrogating’ captured terrorists. Obama’s decision was the rare win win scenario that was politically expedient and correct policy. Almost immediately after the interrogation fire had begun to subside, Nancy Pelosi threw gasoline on it with her wild accusations that the Central Intelligence Agency had misled her, and the rest of Congress, during torture briefings in 2002-2008. Obama would be wise to put a shorter leash-and possible a muzzle- on her in order to focus on his agenda. Her accusations, pretty much accepted as false, have created inner governmental fighting pitting the C.I.A. against the Congress. What a headache for Obama.

In other news, Obama has been criticized for hinting at appointing an “empathetic judge,” whatever that means. Obama would be smart to find an empathetic judge that is left of center, certainly empathy can be found in other places than the far left of the Democratic Party. Conservatives are likely to put up a fight for any judge he nominates; they have little influence other than that. It is all too predictable the language Republican’s will use, throwing out the juicy phrase judicial activism- implying that Obama’s nominee seeks to redistribute wealth and implement his social agenda- will undoubtedly fire up the base. Obama will run into trouble should Republican criticisms of Obama’s nominee begin to ring true, thus creating a messy conferral process. Obama promised to secure American prosperity through his long-term programs and sweeping reforms. For anyone in their right mind to manage such severe ‘change’ they need to remain headstrong and focused. Nancy Pelosi is not his fault but will reflect poorly on Obama should she persist in her finger pointing. The Supreme Court judge is a political disaster waiting to happen. Why give angry, disenfranchised Republicans ammo if avoidable?

4 comments:

  1. If you don't support Obama's agendy, expansion of government, etc, then why would you want him to succeed in implementing his policies

    ReplyDelete
  2. Although I can’t say I agree with much of Obama’s policy, his agenda, the problems he is looking to address, is correct. I can’t say I’m in the Limbaugh school of thought hoping for Obama to fail.

    ReplyDelete
  3. mmmmk Chris just making sure you haven't completely lost it

    ReplyDelete
  4. Obama's pick was a shrewd political one. I can't see Republicans letting her nomination slide, no matter how bad they will look

    ReplyDelete