If you’re a through-and-through progressive, or maybe even the Speaker of the House, and you’re still counting on a far-left agenda from President Obama, you should think again.
If you’re part of the Republican leadership, or a maybe a rank-and-file Rush Limbaugh “Dittohead,” waiting for Obama to enact a flurry of “socialist” regulations on the way to confiscating your grandfather’s blunderbuss and scheduling regular Friday night poker with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, you might want to pump your brakes.
Prepare to be disappointed because Obama’s not falling for the banana in the tailpipe.
Less than a month into the Obama presidency, the net result of two weeks’ worth of ruckus over the president’s economic stimulus legislation, now poised to gain final passage in Congress, is that both liberals and conservatives in Washington have telegraphed their respective playbooks. And the beneficiary is Obama, who maintains a reservoir of goodwill with the American people and may now have the political cover he needs to break for the pragmatic center.
For the moment at least, congressional Republicans still appear to be deluded by their own talking points from the 2008 campaign: presenting Obama as a radical dilettante packaged in a Brooks Brothers suit. Even most mainstream conservatives no longer see him this way, and by defaulting to rejectionism so early, they’ve probably exposed themselves as being a little resentful of Obama’s success. And they may have branded themselves as the exact opposite of “bipartisan”—not a posture they can really afford if they plan to take on a president at the top of his game.
Obama’s handling of the stimulus debate has played out much like his dismantling of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright controversy almost a year ago. In both instances Obama patiently absorbed as many rhetorical blows as he could from Republicans before taking his message directly to the public, laying out his case thoroughly and leaving his detractors without a response.
The New Republic’s Noam Scheiber describes it as a classic rope-a-dope, and the New York Times’ Bob Herbert calls him as a chess master, but perhaps it’s more accurate to think of Obama’s approach as political Tai Chi. Obama’s first moves often appear overly conciliatory, if not downright passive, but he eventually finds a way to use his opponents’ forward momentum against them. By the time they figure out what’s going on, they can’t hold themselves back.
Meanwhile, with the stimulus, Obama’s Democratic House “allies” prematurely shot their wad by tacking on a hodge-podge of spending programs that average Americans didn’t really ask for, mistaking Obama’s enthusiasm for the bill as a vehicle to reinvigorate the New Deal/Great Society agenda.
The political class seems not to have absorbed what the electorate has already figured out: The election of the first black president was groundbreaking, but in one sense, Obama’s election was utterly counterrevolutionary to the degree that he embraces all of the conventional trappings of the American dream, seeking only to expand it to new segments of society, not to confront or alter its component parts.