Casual Observations 02-05-2009
February 5th, 2009
On Wednesday, an alleged reporter was escorted out of the White House after he jumped the rope separating reporters and private guests. He was trying to obtain President Obama’s autograph, but the Secret Service quickly stopped him. Apparently the President’s biggest threat really is being patronized to death.
While some of President Obama’s fans will break the law to get his autograph, others are starting to freak out over his subdued performance. Never mind that he’s been in office for less than three weeks. New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd is bothered that it took Tom Daschle’s resignation to get Obama to stop mimicking the elitist attitude he lectured Americans about for two years. Dowd also complains that Obama screwed up by not editing out the parts of the stimulus bill that have the appearance (Just the appearance, ma’am?) of “Democratic drunken-sailor spending.” Newsweek’s Michael Hirsh thinks the new President’s No. 1 problem is that he’s ceded too much ground to Republicans. Joan Walsh, Slate’s editor in chief, imagines that Obama is losing the stimulus debate because Republicans have been lying about the economy for thirty years, and the Commander in Chief isn’t being assertive enough to overcome that.
This swift backlash opens up the possibility that the President may be more of a mascot than a leader. After all, he was elected for being a charismatic, minority embodiment of liberal clichés. For example, he echoed the penultimate liberal neophyte’s talking point when he mocked John McCain for supporting “trickle-down” economics. The liberals who voted for Obama were really voting for themselves, but now that their new toy isn’t performing like it did on the commercials, they’re getting fussy. This isn’t the first sign that “hope” is fleeting. Remember how gay activists felt “betrayed” leading up to Obama’s inauguration?
The shine is rubbing off of Barack Obama. He’s starting to look tentative and dare I say inexperienced. While he’ll almost certainly navigate his way out of his current slump, perhaps conservatives should feel lucky we’re squaring off against Obama now as opposed to 2016, where he would have potentially had five times the executive seasoning he does now.
The dire stimulus bill is saturated with billions of dollars which have nothing to do with jump-starting the economy. The National Review broke it down, and the vast majority of problems with the bill involve programs which simply don’t address the economic crises, and clearly should be debated in a separate bill. These include $50 million dollars for the NEA, $1 billion for the Census Bureau, and $650 million for digital-TV coupons. Republicans oppose the stimulus package because it truly is a Democratic wish-list. How come Maureen Dowd seems to be the only Obama supporter who understands this?
The abundance of wasteful spending at a time the United States should be watching its wallet is less aggravating that the impression that Democrats don’t care. They aren’t even pretending to be the party of fiscal discipline anymore. The aforementioned Michael Hirsh glibly excuses the stimulus bill’s manifest flaws by writing: “There’s no way anyone can spend $800 to $900 billion quickly without waste and boondoggles.” Why isn’t he concerned about abuse? What about cynical attempts to package pork in an “emergency bill?” Asking Americans to pay $6 billion on building projects in the guise of emergency legislation is like ordering a pizza after dispatch takes your 911 call. It’s selfish and immature and should be exposed as such.
Cross-posted at Modern Conservative