“Rahm couldn’t have picked a better successor,” a former Senate aide who worked closely with Emanuel told The Huffington Post. “Daley has … managed to make people miss [him].” – Bill Daley Leaves Some Democrats Longing For Rahm Emanuel
Oh, the irony.
Obamaworld and Democrats are looking for a scapegoat. It was all a matter of time.
Lyndon Baines Johnson understood a couple of things about which Team Obama is positively clueless. First, it’s the importance of fear over love, which brings with it leverage. Secondly, relationships are destiny in Washington, particularly when dealing with Congress.
MR. CARNEY: Congress doesn’t need a phone call from the President to vote on legislation. That’s a myth. … – White House briefing, 9.15.11
Unfortunately, Obama and company think business is more important than the Legislative Branch of government, so, actually, Bill Daley is perfect for the President’s persona and leadership clubfootedness, which helped lead to the economic disaster we’re all living.
It looks like Ron Suskind has put this picture firmly into focus in his new book:
The book, by Ron Suskind, a former Wall Street Journal reporter, quotes White House documents that say Mr. Obama’s decisions were routinely “re-litigated” by the chairman of the National Economic Council, Lawrence H. Summers. Some decisions, including one to overhaul the debt-ridden Citibank, were carried out sluggishly or not at all by a resistant Treasury secretary, Timothy F. Geithner, according to the book.
Pres. Obama and his loyalists have always believed he would be enough, the magic portion of the political potion that would make Washington miraculously morph into a presidential machine to do his bidding.
Barack Obama is finding out that he is not a world unto himself.
I believe it was Peter Daou who wrote that the progressive movement, the base, the “professional Left,” whatever you want to call this contingent, was turning out to be the canary in the coal mine. However, the traditional media wrote off “far Left bloggers” as irrelevant for a very long time, as did almost always obnoxious Obama loyalists. But with the rumbling now coming from Democratic circles far and wide, from congressional quarters to fundraising big shots, all of a sudden the warnings from progressives are sounding quite prescient.
John Heilemann made mention of this fact on “Morning Joe” this week, but with a dismissive air, implying that when it came from mere bloggers, more importantly known as the progressive new media, it was one thing, but now that insider Dems are bellyaching to the New York Times, look out. Mr. Heilemann was not the only one to dismiss the political canary in the Obama’s reelection coal mine.
David Axelrod can spin this any way he wants.
Stories about Bill Daley’s dismal stewardship will be written.
But pining for Rahmbo? Incredible.
The problem with this storyline is told through the same old tale from so long ago. The fish always rots from the head.
Segue to the White House briefing yesterday with Jay Carney, which tells the rest of this sorry tale.
Q Okay. And then, lastly, on the jobs plan, the Speaker’s office says there has not been any outreach to them, even though — from the White House on the jobs bill, even though last week they requested a meeting. Is that true? And, if so, why hasn’t there been?
MR. CARNEY: Well, first of all, the President spoke a week ago. There will be ample time going forward for continued consultations with leadership and rank-and-file members of Congress as Congress takes up the American Jobs Act and hopefully passes it, so that we can do the things we need to do to grow the economy and create jobs. I don’t have any specific –
Q He said “pass this bill now” more than a hundred times in the last week –
MR. CARNEY: Yes. Well, that’s because it’s so urgent. He is reflecting –
Q Not urgent enough to call the Speaker, though.
MR. CARNEY: He is reflecting the urgency that the American people feel. And there will be, I’m sure, conversations between the White House and the leadership about this as we progress. But what we have — what you know about how Congress works and how Washington works is you need to keep people focused on the task at hand — because there’s so many other issues that can distract attention from the main, which, in this case, are the things we need to do to grow the economy and create jobs. And I’m sure the President will be, and members of his staff will be engaged very directly with Democrats and Republicans in the House and the Senate as this process moves forward.
Q Don’t you think he should call the Speaker before he reaches, say, 200?
MR. CARNEY: I didn’t know you were working for the Speaker on his scheduling. The fact is — he will talk to the Speaker, but it is — the President has put forward a detailed piece of legislation. The elements of that plan are very clear. The Congress can and should act on it very quickly. It’s not complicated. The proposals are very simple. And they reflect — they are the kinds of proposals that have gained bipartisan support in the past. So it’s not –
Q I understand — this is your thing now that when a reporter asks a question you impugn whether or not they have a political motive. But if the President –
MR. CARNEY: No, no, no, no, no. And I apologize. I simply meant –
Q The President goes out there — the President goes out there and says 100 times, “Pass this bill.” I’m asking has he called the man in charge of passing the bill in the House? It seems like a reasonable question –
MR. CARNEY: The President –
Q — and not one that is Republican-motivated.
MR. CARNEY: Jake, the President spoke with the Speaker on the day that he delivered his speech. I’m sure they will be speaking many times in the coming weeks and months about this and many other issues. It doesn’t –
Q But he doesn’t want it passed in weeks and months. He wants it passed now.
MR. CARNEY: He does. And it doesn’t require –
Q And he still hasn’t called the Speaker.
MR. CARNEY: Congress doesn’t need a phone call from the President to vote on legislation. That’s a myth. …
Yeah, well, you know we’re never satisfied. How can you tell when you should pay attention?
Speaking of which, blockquotes still don’t work…
I’ll remind my tech guru again.
” In Robert Caro’s book about LBJ. he relates the story of his Senate race in Texas. Johnson practically invented campaigning by helicopter. He covered hundreds of small towns across Texas by hopping across the country by air. He did most of this while doubled over on the floor of the helicopter in excruciating pain from a kidney stone. His doctor’s told him he had to have surgery, but he knew that would mean the end of his Senate ambitions. During the campaign stops he somehow managed to cover it all up. The minute he was back on the aircraft he would be dying. Can you imagine Obama doing something like that. The great society programs were passed because Johnson, like Clinton, had big hands and he knew how to use them to make a point. ” I’m going to make you an offer you can’t refuse “.
Carney is just as annoying as Gibbs. As for any leadership style that could be applied to Obama, it would be laissez faire. But perhaps that definition is to defined.
Taylor, started skimming thru the release. As an aside, found this quite interesting since I heard through the grapevine more than 2 months ago that Kerry has been prepped about taking over SOS subsequent HRC stepping down after the election. Furthermore, it would make sense why there will be such a contested race in MA for Scott Brown’s (the People’s) seat. Perhaps it is known another seat will be freed up soon. Speculation of course.
Q No. Senator John — (laughter) — Senator John Kerry has decided to forego fundraising during his time on the super committee. Others have not made that choice, obviously. This White House has always, in the past, applauded sort of transparency and lack of conflict of interest. I’m wondering if they would appreciate other members of the committee to make that same pledge.
MR. CARNEY: I certainly commend Senator Kerry on his stand, but I think the issue here is the members of that committee are obligated to fulfill the mandate that Congress gave them.
Well, it’s no secret I think John Kerry is a class act. I’ve had the pleasure of talking with him at some length on issues back when he was running for president.
I think he’d make a superb SoS if Obama gets reelected.
Pres Obama certainly is not the politician LBJ was. I have no doubt that had LBJ inherited the domestic problems Pres Obama did he would have solved them much differently and closer to the core values of the Dem Party and FDR’s New Deal.
However LBJ and Pres Obama are very alike in their roles as CinC. Neither of them had the fortitiude to stand up to the Generals concerning War. LBJ let himself get pushed into Vietnam because of JFK’s initial insertion of troops/advisors and when they asked for more he gave it to them. Ultimately LBJ showed tremendous selflessness and love of country in not running for re-election in1968 for the good of the country, thus willingly giving up the power of the Presidency.
Pres Obama is just like LBJ in that he inherited two Wars, both going badly , and he decided to up the ante in one-Aghanistan , and slowly disengage in the other-Iraq-similar to Nixon’s Vietnamization draw down. Both are failures of leadership and execution. I have said this before in this forum, that the principal reason Pres Obama and Pres Bush were able to keep troops in Iraq and Afghanistan is unlike LBJ and Nixon, there is no draft. If there were a draft we would have been long gone.
In both instances young men and women are dying for no other reason than neither President had the fortitude to say enogh and stop the Wars.
In recent US history,all Presidents say sending men and women into harms way and battle is the hardest decision they have to make and I’m sure it is-but they all do it and sometimes it works out but often it goes terribly, and also you wonder why we did it-Vietnam, The Domincan Republic, Lebanon,Grenada, Panama, The Balkans, Iraq, Afghanistan (the original intent of getting Al Queda, the Taliban amd OBL was abandoned almost instantly).
The one President who didn’t sucumb to the war crowd was Pres Carter, no bombing of Iran, no troops into Afganistan when the Russians went in, yet he is deemed a weak President.. I think those decisions showed great courage.
I know the above was a bit off topic but lets remember that LBJ, as great as he was domestically, had as big a weakness as Pres Obama. Pres Obama has yet to be a great as LBJ domestically and half as good a governing Pres. It is also worth pointing out that Medicare, The Civil Rights act, Voting Rights act and other Great Society programs which were great accomplishments showing great leadership,were passed before Vietnam really escalated and LBJ started to lose his own Party in Congress.and the country.
Regarding this defense that “my subordinates made me do it,” well, I just don’t buy it. If Obama wanted to put Citigroup into receivership — which is exactly what he should have done — he could have insisted on it, and fired Geithner and Summers if necessary to make it happen. At the very least it’s clear that Obama protected Wall Street fiercely during the crucial months after Lehman Brothers failed. And who could forget his fawning over Jamie Dimon and Lloyd Blankfein (CEOs of JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs) as “savvy businessmen.”
Yves Smith thinks that Administration spun Suskind deliberately to take the heat off Obama for the bailouts and for failing to prosecute the banks. I wouldn’t put it past Candidate Obama — or accomplished bureaucratic infighters like Geithner and Summmers — to devise that kind of pr. http://bit.ly/qD3J0G
Yes, plus the other point you’re making, though you might not realize it, is via the phrase “Geithner and Summers”. All his economic advisors are these sort of people. They’re not Keynesians or MMTers, socialists, or anything other than Chicago Schoolers and Wall Street pirates. It’s his philosophy, which I suspect is why Obama either didn’t give such an order, or else no one he gave it to took him seriously.