The president needs to start communicating again, break out of his Ivy League comfort zone and get tough with opponents.
As he ponders the "shellacking" the Democratic Party took in last Tuesday's elections, President Obama should begin the second half of his term by overcoming his aversion to dealing with the bad things of the past. Remember, he rejected calls for investigations into possible wrongdoing by Bush administration officials, insisting that, instead, he preferred to look forward.
That was the first disappointment to many of his supporters, and a bad sign of things to come. After promising that he would close the prison camp at Guantánamo Naval Base, he dragged his feet. He fiddled around on getting rid of "Don't ask, don't tell" -- again, contrary to what his supporters felt were concrete promises. He did not get rid of earmarks or curtail lobbyists, as promised. When he proposed sweeping health care reform, he let it be known that he was not as excited about a controversial public-option portion as was much of his public.
Those were bitter developments for his more liberal constituents. But there was more. He left it almost entirely up to Congress to work out the details of his health care reform. Congress? Even amateur politicians in Washington know better than that. Then the president seemed to distance himself from the day-to-day trench work that's usually mandatory for legislation of that magnitude. Obama further insisted on waiting for some GOP assistance to ensure bipartisanship. He waited and waited and waited.
Fuzzy vision and strange moves on important issues, as well as nonspecifics on policy, leave the electorate confused and frustrated, and unnecessarily mad. Worse, opponents are emboldened.
Republicans, ragged from the 2008 stomping by Obama and the Democrats, regarded a president whom they deemed ready to deal, or cave, even before negotiations began as a resuscitator. They saw such actions as weakness, and a beacon of hope for a rigid policy of just saying no. The president became hapless Charlie Brown in Charles Schulz's annual holiday homage to hocus-pocus, with Lucy (the GOP) snatching away the football every single time little Charlie went to kick it. Obama began to look silly begging Republicans -- any Republican -- for support. And now he is accused of not seeking GOP cooperation over the past two years.
With their early success in resisting Obama, Republicans gained self-confidence in a singular objective that they articulated without apology: the destruction of Obama and his presidency. South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint declared that health reform would be Obama's Waterloo, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said after last week's midterms that the party's priority for the next two years will be to make Obama a one-term president.
How could all this have happened in two years since the country, and the world, went gaga over America's first black president? I do not believe it was his politics or his policies -- although they certainly were factors -- as much as it was race (more so than most white Americans are willing to acknowledge, given our horrific racial history).
In some ways, Obama's highly effective and successful campaign for president was partly to blame for his problems. It reminds me of a great preacher's Sunday sermon -- and indeed, Obama was in the pulpit in pursuit of the presidency. His eloquent rhetoric set the voters on fire, and his exhortations to action met eager ears and an anxious electorate ready to do battle, similar to the "amen" and "preach" chorus heard at sermons, the congregants pumped up and ready to go, to personally take on the devil himself.