The conventional wisdom that current “stenographic” efforts of the Washington Post are directed by Rahm Emanuel inspires my inner contrarian automatically, even as I remain a Rahm agnostic.
So in yet another week we get another Rahm tale in the Washington Post. But getting beyond the knee jerk hatred of everything Rahm, there is no reason to believe Mr. Obama wouldn’t lean towards listening to David Axelrod, who is the one who got him into the White House. People like Axe, Val, Gibby and Dave, all very loyal to what the President’s priorities were as a candidate also believing that staying true to his non-ideological roots is the way back to where Obama’s remarkable story began. Besides, as many have learned, team Obama doesn’t take criticism or suggestions from members outside the original choir, where Rahm began.
However, it is interesting that the quotes below from Graham on Emanuel come on the day after the new political “odd couple” story was written for Politico. Perhaps one reason Jim VandeHei said flatly today on “Morning Joe” that he “would bet a lot of money” that Emanuel wasn’t part of the Post story today; the other reason being VandeHei is a former Washington Post man who’s got plenty of his own sources and likely wouldn’t “bet a lot of money” on tape if he wasn’t pretty sure.
It’s impossible not to acknowledge that the closing Gitmo drama, which likely got Greg Crag axed, is illustrative of the larger Democratic divide.
In December 2008, Obama, Emanuel and Republican Sens. John McCain (Ariz.) and Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.) met in Obama’s transition headquarters in Chicago to discuss detainee policy. According to Graham, Obama turned to him at one point and said, “I’m going to need your help closing Guantanamo Bay. . . . I want you and Rahm to start talking.” They did, and as the discussions progressed, Emanuel grew wary that closing the U.S. military prison in Cuba was possible without opening a slew of other politically sensitive national security problems. “This stuff is like flypaper,” Graham recalled Emanuel saying. “It will stick to you.”
In an ironic twist, Emanuel’s dissent is likely what stuck.
When you have Debbie Wasserman Schultz quoted directly, versus some anonymous Washington lip flapping tale, it should make anyone interested in Obama succeeding, which regardless of disagreements we should all agree is critically important, take notice.
Listening to Emanuel would serve “all our overall goals,” said Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.). “I think that Rahm’s considerable legislative experience translates into advice that the president should heed.”
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz is as smart as they get.
But if you think I’m being obstinate on the whole Rahm is leaking issue, believing instead that there is real frustration with Pres. Obama and his closest campaign team who aren’t listening to anyone, which is the foundation of these Rahm articles. After all, there’s no better target than Rahm Emanuel, everyone’s favorite scapegoat and the easiest person to get fired. Maybe another reason the knives are out.
Ezra Klein does me one better. He’s pro Rahm and believes the problem is really Scott Brown, because if it weren’t for Brown’s victory in Massachusetts Dems would have actually passed health care weeks ago.
If not for Scott Brown’s unexpected victory in Massachusetts, it would have passed weeks ago. We’d be on our way to implementing a bill that would cover 30 million Americans, completely reform the insurance market, make a serious start on cost control, end the days when sick people couldn’t get health insurance, and create a new coverage infrastructure that could absorb the flood of refugees from the dying employer-based system. That deserves some weight in this discussion.
Whether health-care reform passes, what’s undeniably clear is that it could have passed.
This is a truly stunning assertion that comes with absolutely no proof whatsoever, though the use of the word “could” would also take us back to last July when Democrats could have passed health care then, too, if Obama would have led on the issue. Klein believing Obama’s whole problem is health care. While it’s symbolic of overall Democratic incompetence, the issue is larger.
If you put together Wasserman Schultz and Lindsay Graham’s comments you get a very wide telephone cord that has Rahm holding up the middle, with Pres. Obama standing on the outside getting creamed from all sides. Considering the general discontent with Mr. Obama from Democrats at this point it’s not a far stretch to say that Rahm may be the manipulative, backstabbing, Blue Dog loving, “f—ing retarded” attack dog that everyone loves to hate, but the fact remains that Obama is flailing.
If you stand back from the Rahm hysteria, what you see is a White House that doesn’t know how to govern. Just today we get yet another deadline date on health care. This time it’s Easter bunnies and chocolate eggs as opposed to Christmas trees, turkeys at Thanksgiving, August recess, spring to summer turned to Teddy’s death.
Perhaps Mr. Emanuel will end up being the fall guy for Obama’s first year failures, but there’s no evidence that firing him alone will solve the Democrats’ problems.
Taylor – good analysis but let’s be honest – I don’t care how you dice it or slice it, Obama is President and he has to accept the responsibility for the way the past year went. He’s the one who will be up for re-election (if he decides to run) in 2012, not Rahm or any of the other above mentioned characters. This is Obama’s presidency. He can make it or break it.
And Scott Brown’s election and non-passage of health care reform doesn’t equate. Health care reform should have/could have been passed long before Brown came on the scene had the WH taken a more active role in the process.
Taylor, I look at it this way Americans wanted change and boy did they get change in the wrong direction…lol
When they wanted a Family Values Guy after the Clinton fallout…Americans chose Bush over Gore & Kerry. When Bush proved to be a inept bully…voters wanted a visionary named Obama. Now, that his visions have proved just illusions they are back to the drawing board…looking across the aisle at Sarah “Savior” Palin and Mitt “Cars sales men” Romney.
Mr. Emanuel was suppose to keep the White House running in tip top shape.But, that has proved to be just another illusion for voters. The republicans are winning the media wars because they are willing to fight for their share of power. While Dems lead by President Barack “Lets all get along” Obama is stuck in neverland.
Even though Bill Clinton struggled during his first term in office…He was still seen as a fighter. The same can be said of Ronald Regan who had much lower poll numbers then Obama around this time. Regan fought hard for his policies in public no matter the media narrative. Obama still has a chance to overcome all this an win another term. I no longer trust what the punditry says about his chances. Certain media figures have always counted Obama out during the Rev. Wright scandals, William Aryes etc… Everyone kept saying he’s finished blah, blah,blah…Yet, the guy with a Muslim sounding name beat out everyone to win the White House. However,after saying all that I do get the feeling he never intended to “really” seek a second term. If his poll numbers drop Jimmy Carter levels then you might see Obama make announcement not to run.
Without sounding too simplistic Marie205, I think there was a concerted effort to keep a certain female out of the WH and the powers that be succeeded. Obama won only because McCaim was such a terrible option. I don’t know if Obama is finished. He certainly appears to want to play the role of a mediator when we need a CEO who can conceptualize and visualize a future for this country. This is just my opinion but he’s been a big disappointment to me and the many people who worked to get him elected.
Jane Austen says:
02 March 2010 at 2:59 pm
Already said that, JA:
http://www.taylormarsh.com/2010/02/22/president-rahm/
…and suggest you re-read the last line.
Marie205, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever that Obama would not seek re-election. He is still personally popular and though the Dems have a lot of problems, as does Pres. Obama, he still beats anything the Republicans have to offer.
Taylor Marsh says:
02 March 2010 at 3:23 pm
uh?
“I think there was a concerted effort to keep a certain female out of the WH and the powers that be succeeded.” -Jane Austen
Your correct about Dems working hard to keep a “certain female” out of office in 2008. However, we must never forget her campaign suffered greatly under Mark Penn directions. The list is to long on why she failed to make it to the White House. I doubt Palin will make the same mistakes after seeing what happen to Hillary. I’ll leave it at that-
“He is still personally popular and though the Dems have a lot of problems, as does Pres. Obama, he still beats anything the Republicans have to offer.” -Taylor Marsh
Obama level of popularity is eerily similar to Ronald Regans during his first term. I can’t find the article but Jimmy Carter mention that he didn’t understand why the media keeps comparing Obama poll numbers an failures to his; when in fact, Obama numbers mirror somewhere between Regan an Bill Clinton at this stage. I do believe Obama can get reelected. Just that it will very hard depending on who the Republican nominee. If Obama faces off against Palin the country will be split down the middle on voting day. And if, its Mitt Romney then Obama can win in a possible squeaker. I personally, believe he might not really want reelection…because he does not seem to fight like a person seeking one.
Marie205 has a point about Obama. To say it another way. Of course he will run for re-election. There is nothing to indicate that he wouldn’t. But, if he did not, would it really be a big surprise?
President Obama reminds me of the kid who when he first gets a copy of the “Sears Wishbook” (for those of you olde enough to remember it!) and says “oooh I want that and I want that and I want that, oh no, I changed my mind – now I want that”. Then the parent said “we can’t do that right now because I don’t have a job any more (lost my 60 votes in the Senate)” Then he says stamping his feet “but I want all that and you better give it to me or I am going next door and get it from the neighbor (GOP)” Surprise! The neighbor won’t give it to him either so he is back pleading with the parent for his list of gifts from the wishbook. Problem now is it is March and the Wishbook is out of date and the new catalog is out but he still wants his items from the Wishbook. The other problem is not only are his parents out of work – half the neighborhood is also. No worries – the wishbook is still the most important thing on his mind except once again he has changed his list.
Rahm plays the role of the big brother who tries to bully everyone for the items on the list but once again – the list gets changed and he has to charge a different direction.
I sincerely do not understand why Obama is shoveling more people (long term voting Democrats) under the bus. Now he is adding lawyers (tort reform – doesn’t work – we tried that in Texas – don’t get me started), Medicare Advantage (Seniors – no wonder he didn’t want Florida to count) and others in a pander to the GOP who still won’t vote for it for whatever reason they come up with when it is time to vote.
Watching him is like rasing my children again only without any of the control.
Poor old Rahm ‘why’s everybody picking on me’ Emanuel. Probably because the guy is a backstabbing snake. “Out, damn spot!” Peace
Good piece from Dan Froomkin:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/02/rahm-emanuel-saboteur-of_n_482638.html
Froomkin has a point. Up to a point. I disagree entirely with his thinking that “there is not that much daylight between him and his boss.” Absent Rahm there would have been a very different Obama over the past 12 months. But the only way to really know that is to either sideline or fire this slug. And damn soon. Peace
Thanks for that article Taylor. I love Froomkin and forget to look for him on HuffPO.
Imhotep~ Bless your heart
you still believe.
Imotep,
Why is it always somebody else’s fault? Obama chose Rahm and Obama can get rid of Rahm if he wants to. Obama chose to have political people instead of policy people. These are Obama’s choices and they reflect on Obama. You’re also saying that Obama is apparently incapable of leading which I agree with but what’s the solution?
Just finished reading the Froomkin piece = very interesting. I do like Froomkin.
Where’s t4h? My guess she’s following the election returns – I sure hope Perry doesn’t break 50%. Although my guess is Mendina is hurting Perry – not KBH.