Americans Are Getting Angrier; Will They Take It out On Obama?

REPUBLICANS ARE POISED TO TAKE UP THE POPULIST MANTLE
Here's something a bit worrisome: It is now apparent President Obama failed the first test of his decision-making abilities when he appointed Timothy Geithner to the Treasury. Worse, it was the one cabinet position that needed to sufficiently filled for the times we live. Shockingly, the administration has backed dubious bank-friendly policies and incoherent explanations from Geithner about what he intends to do with the banks. Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz has a fine article in The Nation this week that illustrates the Treasury Department's apprehension to make the tough decisions.

Robert Reich says get rid of him before more damage is done, although he recommends Paul Volcker, whose monetary policies were the reason for the 1981-82 recession--the original worst recession since the Great Depression?

It is possible that we will look back at the administration's feeble attempts to dissuade AIG not to pay up to $165 million in bonuses to the very people who torched the company and the economy as the beginning of populist anger that can be easily co-opted by the Republican party. Most likely, the immense pressure the White House and Congress can apply will force AIG to find some sort of escape clause allowing them to recoup the bonuses, but the damage has been done. While the former president signed off executive orders with impunity, even possibly trashing the Constitution in the process, this president cannot stop an insolvent insurance company masquerading as a hedge fund from doing the wrong thing. This is not the sort of change in Washington Obama vowed to bring.

Although Obama currently garners the support of about two-thirds of opinion polls, it's hard not to see the likelihood of Congressional losses in 2010 and here the seed may have been sown. History has shown the havoc that can be caused with a restless, underemployed electorate. Mix in, an incredibly weak minority party waiting for the perfect campaign theme and you have the recipe for a reawakened Republican party.

By the fall, the poor economy can fairly be viewed as "owned" by Obama's policies and populist anger is something that can easily be molded to your own means. All Republicans would have to do in mid-term elections is point to the perception no one in administration seems to know how to fix the problem, so they just throw "taxpayer" money at it. The Republicans don't even have to be particularly dirty to make the point, either.

Rep. Mitch McConnell makes a cogent point in the Times, "The government has been heavily involved in A.I.G. for some months now. It’s shocking that they would — the administration would come to us now and act surprised about these contracts. Why didn’t they ask the question two weeks ago, before they gave them $30 billion?” An editorial in today's Wall Street Journal also makes this point and rightly points the finger at politicians, too.

If the public continues to see the economy grow worse in tandem with these easily recognizable abuses by the financial sector, it is likely conservatives will make positive gains next year while the image of Obama as the "chosen one" is greatly diminished.

The Politics of Forgotten Politics Past

THE GOP BRAND IS DOWN, BUT NOT OUT

Everything is coming up roses for Democrats these days. The President is loved. Americans are uplifted by his words and change is poised to spill across the land--nothing is going to stop us now! Except, such exuberance is part and parcel of any new administration and history always has something to say about such matters. These days feel similar to President Bush's election in 2000--sans the goodwill among Americans--but Republicans were similarly glib. Karl Rove was planning to make the GOP the dominant party in the U.S. for generations. He would even went as far as attempting to exterminate the Democratic party. The tide has turned, though.

Democrats are in a fog of triumphalism that cannot possibly continue. Political luck goes only so far. To latch on to the remote possibility of doing what the GOP attempted to foist upon the Democrats is a waste of energy in a time when grave circumstances hover over the Capitol.

Here's a bit of the liberal naivete going around: Two respected bloggers, Alex Koppelman at Salon's War Room blog and Marc Ambinder at The Atlantic envision a Republican Armageddon in today's Gallup story culled from 2008 election data which says only four states (all in the wild West) are overwhelmingly red. Koppelman adds, "This is most likely not the kind of thing that gets fixed easily." Really?

How quickly the past eight years are forgotten-specifically 2002-2005--when the tables were turned. After fearing a Democrat would never win another presidential election and flubbing two straight, we have left-leaning journalists falling over themselves in glee.

Both bloggers padded their arguments with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's comments to the RNC today where his fear of the party's collapse was not as fearful as other may view it--as John McCain might say, "the fundamentals" of the party are sound. The Gallup map shows only Utah, Idaho, Wyoming and Alaska as solidly Republican. Shockingly, the data puts Texas in the competitive column.

Now, really! There are an infinite amount of occurrences that can change the map and attitudes in a hurry. The data based on party affiliation and skewing sharply towards Democrats is going to continue to grow as it has for the last 10-15 years, but to have a blanket of Bible Belt states in competition is highly improbably once you attach a conservative candidate to the polling. No matter who is in the White House regions like the inner West and the South where the post-industrial economy ha not penetrated the workforce, these areas will continue to vote for a Republican candidate.

The easiest way for Republicans to remake the map without changing the way they do business is simply to wait for President Obama to falter in alleviating the failing economy. If he does it poorly enough, House Republicans for one could easily siphon off large chunks of the Democratic majority Nancy Pelosi presides over by 2010 or 2012.

Indeed, the country is trending to the left and will continue with new young voters and immigrants, but touting these results so early in the new administration is kind of like saying the Yankees will, without a doubt, win the World Series after spending a third-world country's GNP on three superstars. There is much time to for everything to change and it is guaranteed to happen. Besides, the Three G's--gays, guns and God--have a way of stoking conservative fears around the country, too.

Obama's Recovery Plan Moves To The Center

WITH TIME RUNNING OUT, CONGRESSIONAL DISUNITY STYMIES OBAMA

Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell says he has no qualms with President-elect Barack Obama's stimulus plan – and that could be a problem in itself.

After eight years of tax cuts under President Bush, some Democrats – especially Northeastern liberals like Sen. John Kerry and Rep. Barney Frank – think that giving tax breaks to businesses and middle-class families will not create long-term job growth. Scott Lehigh, writing in the Boston Globe's op-ed page, thinks tax cuts make little sense and wonders whether they exist in Obama's plan as a carrot to Republicans.

Democrats are also leery about heaping more debt on the books. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the deficit will reach $1.2 trillion in 2009, not including Obama's stimulus plan. Some in Washington also believe the total stimulus price tag will ultimately reach closer to $1 trillion. Obama's preliminary estimate is around $775 billion.

With 11 days until inauguration day, Obama, like President Franklin D. Roosevelt 76 years ago, will be afforded a brief honeymoon period in Washington and this is the impetus for the presidential feel of yesterday's speech at George Mason University.

Former labor secretary under President Clinton, Robert Reich, believes the government stimulus should reach upwards of $900 billion spread over two years and urges for it to be done quickly. "Without federal action, next year could be even worse," Reich told congressmen at a forum discussing the stimulus bill in Washington.

On his blog, Reich urges Congress to spend without caution of overextending itself.

As the buyer of last resort, the federal government must respond if that cycle is to be reversed. In my judgment, this will require a stimulus of about 6 and a half percent of gross domestic product, or a total of some $900 billion, spread over two years. That’s my estimate for the shortfall in private demand. But the federal government should stand ready to spend larger sums if necessary to get the economy back on track toward full capacity. The danger is not that the government will do too much; the danger is that it will do too little, too late.

Reich agrees with Obama's plan to upgrade the nation's infrastructure as does Paul Krugman, but some disagree with the basic Keynesian approach. Larry Kudlow at the National Review mocks Obama's progressive pedigree by saying his stimulus plan is somewhat Reaganesque. "Nobody really believes infrastructure spending will end the recession or create permanent new jobs. However, it’s interesting just how much the Obama plan has changed since the election," he wrote.

Here lies the problem facing Washington: in the shadow of a clumsily rolled out $700 billion bailout for the financial sector where many do not know where the money went and fewer gained any stimulus from the investment, how will what many people see as a chronically ineffective legislative branch deal decisively with the economy? Obama wants a bill ready to sign from Congress by Feb. 13. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is already pushing to extend the deadline. Meanwhile, unemployment reaches 7.2 percent and the prospect of this year being somewhat better than the last decreases


This article and others can be found at The Commonwealth Club of California's blog commonwealthclub.blogspot.com. Also, read about the unspoken demise of employed Americans who are not only making less money per hour, but working less of them.

Developing Storyline: Can't Trust Those Democrats

THREE WEEKS BEFORE INAUGURATION, GOP HAS SOMETHING ON NEW ADMIN.

So much for the big, scary liberal media operating in tandem with the incoming Obama administration and Democratic Congress to turn America into a socialist panacea.

If the audacity of Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich allegedly selling the state's vacant U.S. Senate seat Chicago-style wasn't enough political crookedness, now comes these headlines from The New York Times:

"A Donor’s Gift Soon Followed Clinton’s Help" and today, "Richardson Won’t Pursue Cabinet Post". The latter referring to New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson take his name out of consideration as Obama's Commerce Secretary because of an alleged pay-to-play scheme in his state.

Blagojevich, Clinton, and now Richardson...so much for change in Washington.

There seems to be a trend developing that surely has Republicans salivating. With still three weeks before the incoming administration takes power, Senate Minority Whip, Mitch McConnell already has three examples of Democrats acting in a supremely egregious manner. How soon until every wide-ranging progressive idea from expanding health care to stoking the stagnant economy is torpedoed by Republican rhetoric about the unapologetic graft of Democrats? How can we trust these guys with our tax dollars, the GOP will likely cry ad nauseam.

When Obama and others say something akin to "good ideas come to Washington to die" we really had a different view of how it would go down--with political posturing, not the plausible argument of trust in the party in power.