This pretty much sums it up:
Before this latest outgushing from our Blowhard-In-Chief happened, I had put this up on my white board last last week and just never got around to doing anything with it:
The only tool Obama seems to have is a hammer & people are getting tired of him seeing everything and everybody as nails. What kind of President can only function successfully when he is demonizing / ridiculing everything that he doesn’t like?
My question is: for a person who presented himself during the campaign as "being above partisan politics" and "business as usual in Washington"; he acted Presidential – and now?
It is a serious question – how effective can a President be, long term, when he has taken the Clinton aspect of the politics of personal destruction and brought it to a higher level on bigger targets? Not only that, has done so almost on a non-stop basis – every week a new target to not just complain about, but to bully it into the ground? In the case of BP, there certainly is fault to be handed out and it is fair to skewer them for ignoring some of the warning signs of the blowout, ignoring some of standard safety rules, and cutting corners. But it isn’t fair to level criticism merely at BP – there are a whole host of characters – the sub-contractors running the show, the vendors of the equipment – and the laxness of the Government regulation that, during Obama’s watch, signed off on this. And I, too, will add the environmentalists into the mix – for why else would deep drilling exist but for the protestations of more shallow or land based drilling but for them? They certainly have a part to play in making it more difficult and expensive to obtain the oil that powers our economy, pushing the boundaries of what is possible.
Yet, other than in mere passing, Obama once again fails to flog Government for screwing up its oversight – where were the plans for mitigation? I often point out his Inaugural words:
The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works — whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified."
– President Barack Obama, Inauguration, 1/20/09
In this case, bupkis – it didn’t work. No, it was not responsible for an accident. And no, it cannot solve the deep engineering difficulties faced at 5,000 ft down – as has been shown it has neither the equipment nor the capability to do so. But, it was supposed to have plans in plans and was supposed to be able to rally what it could (e.g., fire booms, skimmers, outside help where such help WAS able to be brought in at less technically challenging depths and areas of expertise – but failed to do so. Obama dithered and did nothing. But I digress.
Sure, everyone expects, upon taking office, for a new President to rail against certain things – but only for a time. He just doesn’t stop.
The Presidency is a bully-pulpit office; much can be achieved by speaking about things directly to the public (or your friends and enemies) in what is the largest megaphone in the world. One of the problems that…
…I had with Bush is that he failed to use it often enough in defense of himself and the underlying ideas of his philosophy (like them or not). Bush lost much support for non-self-defense – people needed to know the Whys and not just the Whats.
Obama, on the other hand, goes to the other extreme and is over-exposed in jaw-boning almost everything and mostly in very negative terms. From the middle to the Right (and some on his extreme Left (if that is possible)), he as targeted people and groups over and over again. Corporate entities that don’t knuckle under to the Chicago way, his thin-skinned reaction to those on the Right that disagree with his philosophy, and formerly close allied nations have all felt his wrath and the back of his political hand.
Is this what the Presidency has devolved to – a Bullier-in-Chief? Is this what we want in the Leader of the Free World, the Leader of the most powerful free country in the world? Sure, from time to time, it is both allowed and sometimes needed, but we have been and continue to be subjected to an almost unending stream of Presidential posturing.
Or is it more of Determined Weakness? Let me go here: feminists are all over those that oppress women, especially in domestic cases. The abuse starts with the name calling, the shouting, the act of verbally creating and berating victims. While there is a wide gulf between the two situations (an abuse husband or wife towards their spouse or significant other, and the calling out by a President), is the President starting to model that behavior towards the individual and corporate citizens of the US?
It seems that only those that fit his notion of "correctness" fail to invoke his wrath – and more and more, when you go below the surface of what that is, it seems to be aligned with those that show a hatred for traditional America. Is that the plan – browbeating into silence on one hand and browbeating by legislative speed, laws, and regulation on the other?
His hand is not light, as a skillful pilot of some craft has learned is best under most conditions.
Hamfisted is more like it – and the majority of people are or soon will learn to resent it from someone who is inhabiting what should be the most respected office in the world.