If he’s thinking that and acting on that, does that mean he’s already a lame duck? The Republicans seem to be acting like it to boost November. They’re watching out for themselves even more than usual — if that’s even possible for a politician — no matter what it does to the country.
There is, I think, an amazing political fact right now that is hiding in plain sight and is rich with implications. It was there in President Obama’s Jan. 25, pre-State of the Union interview with ABC’s Diane Sawyer, who was pressing him about his political predicaments. “I’d rather be a really good one-term president than a mediocre two-term president,” he said. “And I—and I believe that.”
Now this is the sort of thing presidents say, and often believe they believe, but at the end of the day they all want two terms. Except that Mr. Obama shows every sign of meaning it, and if he does, it explains a lot about his recent decisions and actions.
A week after the Sawyer interview, the president had a stunning and revealing exchange with Sen. Blanche Lincoln, the Arkansas Democrat likely to lose her 2010 re-election campaign. He was meeting with Senate Democrats to urge them to continue with his legislative agenda. Mrs. Lincoln took the opportunity to beseech him to change it. She urged him to distance his administration from “people who want extremes,” and to find “common ground” with Republicans in producing legislation that would give those in business the “certainty” they need to create jobs.
While answering, Mr. Obama raised his voice slightly and quickened his cadence. “If the price of certainty is essentially for us to adopt the exact same proposals that were in place leading up to the biggest economic crisis since the Great Depression . . . the result is going to be the same. I don’t know why we would expect a different outcome pursuing the exact same policy that got us in this fix in the first place.” He continued: “If our response ends up being, you know . . . we don’t want to stir things up here,” then “I don’t know why people would say, ‘Boy, we really want to make sure those Democrats are in Washington fighting for us.'”
More about the Pharma issue from the video above here. Change you can believe in!
Sounds like spin. I find it hard to believe he is talking like that to Democratic Senators. Does he think he’s on The West Wing?
Overall, Obama has been a pretty good President so far… considering the mess he inherited. I’d vote for him again! But now Congress are the real “lame ducks”… they just can’t seem to get anything done or move things along.
Sometimes, life hands you opportunity, and other times it is forced upon you. Like any terrible job you have to take because to not take it means more headache than just doing it and getting it over with. Maybe he thought he COULD change something, only to realize he picked the wrong time to try.
Of course, this IS Washington….where as long as you can lie decently, you get to keep a pretty well paying gig.
Summary of what’s happening:
* Obama is governing, the Republicans are mid term campaigning.
* The American people want him to succeed, the GOP want him to fail.
Pres Obama is NOT thinking 2012 elections. It’s the sensational news media that’s eager to generate sheep entertainment.
I really don’t get what Obamas up to. He talks a good talk. But what I want to see is results.
And on that he keeps missing the mark. Badly. On health reform – he didn’t provide a direction, and we just have confusion. And a half arsed result.
I don’t know if he is getting his ass kicked, being out maneuvered, or if he thinks this is how you get things done. He needs to have a position, take some risks, go out there and argue for it, and make it happen. I’d respect that far more, even if he failed than his current ineffective floundering.
That said doing nothing is better than doing something that’s stupid. So he still remains a better choice than McCain/Palin.
If the Republicans can actually come up with somebody who talks some sense (Palin obviously is never going to work), then he may indeed be a one term president. Not only that, but a one term president, that achieved nothing.
Somehow I spotted this, and don’t ask me how, but immediately I knew that that short manufacturing clip was actually a clip of Sesame Street from the 80’s. It was a segment on making crayons. I Googled it and I was right.
#5 I agree with everything you say.
I can see two explanations for Obama.
1. His real, and sole, talent is self promotion.
2. This was the plan the entire time. One term and a comfy retirement writing books and doing speaking tours.
I favor the second. I have never seen such media love for anyone as during the Dem ’08 primary. That, to me, seemed like a lot of palms being greased or promises made.
Hillary and McCain were both tough personalities who were known for Senate bipartisanship. Danger, Danger!
Obama was a malleable new face. Since the media could take as well as give they have real power.
Until you spread your wings you’ll have no idea how far you can walk. 🙂
I think if he believed his ideas were more important than a 2nd term, we’d have a health-insurance (not health-care) bill passed by now.
And, he’d have vetoed his own stimulus package, sending it back, saying there was too much pork.
Chuck….
Exactly. Health insurance reform can easily be had in a bi-partisan vote. But that’s not what is happening because the goal of the left lead by Obama is to use health care reform to govern everything you and I do because everything will be looked under the lens of HEALTH CARE. Thus, the government can regulate almost about everything by claiming it’s a health issue.
And Obama surely wants a 2nd term. His rhetoric far exceeds his ability to act. He has shown again that his campaign claims were hollow and said only to get suckers to vote for him.
What is even more sad is that some people above, ignoring how Obama has flip flopped on so many issues, still love the guy. That is a mental disorder, if you ask me.
Btw, Obama, contrary to his untruthful commercial, plays “the Washington Game” very well. He had no intentions of ending it.
It’s why independents now realize they voted for a Charlatan and why a Republican land slide win in 2010 could be why Obama will be a one term president.
May be the republicans ought to bring back Gingrich. Newt is a lot better than recent choices.
During 2008, the idea I got from Obama was that since he was intellectual and not part of the Washington culture that he would make the kind of unconventional decisions that a traditional politician would fear.
For example, my perception is that he would lift the embargo against Cuba. Clearly, he’d close Gitmo and wind down troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and the US would have political cover because we elected a new leader.
Maybe he’d end unnecessarily military spending in places like Germany or Japan or Korea.
I did expect him to do a great depression like stimulous package, but was appalled by how hodge podge it was and he let Congress go wild.
Then he went back on everything he had said about health care reform on the way to winning Democratic nomination, where he strongly disagreed with Hillary on the “individual insurance mandate” and the idea of government run insurance.
The “people” gave him 60 senators to work with, I think people wanted change — something NO modern president has ever had.
And we didn’t get so much as banking reform …
When are we going to figure out that BOTH sides aren’t on our side, they’re on their side. The Democrats are as crooked as the Republicans, and their sole goal is to stay in office. If that weren’t the case, we’d have meaningful healthcare, banking, and lobby reform by now.
Let’s hope so.
If he is defeated in 2012, the Black “community” will riot, there will be endless claims of voting fraud, and a few years of animosity and hatred over the result. Notice, there was not a bit of voter fraud accusations in 2008, because their guy won. Better he declines to run for a second term. If Hillary loses,nobody will care.
Obama is NOT a one term president because — like with Clinton — the Repubs have no candidate to run against him. Jindal? Palin? Har.
As I see it, the only party of change is the Tea Party! I look forward with great anticipation to hearing their budget-balancing, America-saving proposals to cut Social Security and Medicare without inciting riots among senior citizens.
Teabaggers might even get a firsthand look at “death panels” as soon as they start turning rhetoric into concrete proposals. That’s where it always seems to get sticky. The self-interest that is the driving force of capitalism is also alive and well in nearly every aspect of politics and governance. God save us from ourselves.
#16 It’ll be Romney or Jeb Bush as the candidate. Outside chance on Huckabee.
I think the Republicans are underestimating Obama. Reagan sunk to 35% approval rate in his first term. But a lot can change in the next two years. I’m still thinking the Republicans will have a turf war with the Tea Party. I’m hoping Palin runs as an independent – it makes for good entertainment.
We liberals WISH Obama would act like a one-term president… for the GOOD reasons.
Instead he may be a one-term president because he keeps trying to compromise with the people who wrecked the country in the first place.
“I’d rather be a really good one-term president than a mediocre two-term president,” – nonsense equal to saying “I’ll kick that ball very hard, but it will move slowly”.
If he is a really good president in first term, he will be re-elected.
> dusanmal said, on February 13th, 2010 at 9:23 am
>> “I’d rather be a really good one-term president than a mediocre two-term president,” – nonsense equal to saying “I’ll kick that ball very hard, but it will move slowly”.
Goodness, you guys spin EVERYTHING, no matter how dumb it makes you seem.
Don’t tell me you’ve never heard the phase, “It’s better to try and fail than to never have tried at all.”
That’s exactly what Obama means.
But of course you know that.
But conservatives do this ALL THE TIME. They INTENTIONALLY misinterpret what the opposition says and then ATTACK THE MIS-INTERPRETATION.
For example, how stupid must one be to HONESTLY believe that Obama doesn’t know there are 50 states? Yet, millions of conservatives claim they are actually that stupid.
Obama is the first president who is purposely trying to destroy the nation.
It doesn’t really matter if Obama wants to be a one term president or not. When his oppressive tax increases fully hit an already angry public he’ll be lucky to finish this term.
With jobs disappearing at such a high rate and the money running out the angry will have plenty of time to deal Obama his impending fate.
“Obama is the first president who is purposely trying to destroy the nation.”
Really? He’s doing it purposely? Would you say he’s trying 1) harder, 2) just as hard, or 3) not quite as hard as the bankers, politicians, and millions of ordinary citizens who together created the largest financial bubble in the history of mankind, a bubble destined to deflate with catastrophic consequences that lowered our tax receipts and increased government spending?
WARNING: Listening to Rush Limbaugh can produce symptoms very similar to dementia. For your own sake, step away from the radio.
Dodd, your Mom goes to College.
#23-Gary, the dangerous infidel
We can’t forget that Obama is the guy in charge.
As we look around after a year of Obama’s reign and see growing and unprecedented destruction we can easily conclude that Obama is either doing it on purpose or is the most incompetent president ever.
And that’s taking into account what a total loser Jimmy Carter is.
Since you aren’t willing to place blame squarely on the shoulders of Barney Frank and Chris Dodd then Obama is the man.
Besides everyone knows that the fish rots from the head down.
OK..
WHO wants his job?? DO YOU??
Lets take 300 kids..
You get to be a kid also, and CONTROL/get them to do WHAT YOU WANT..
Lets call the PARENTS= lobbyists..
These are the ones BEHIND, trying to tell you that LITTLE BILLY is allergic to peanuts, and you cant have peanut butter sandwich for LUNCH.
NOW try to build a snow fort, and find out 1/2 the kids dont have gloves. Another groups PARENTS say they cant do it and they need to go home. THEN the school bell rings, and everyone goes HOME..
You stand in an empty school yard full of snow.
#22 — Since there is not much change from Bush to Obama, Obama’s plan to destroy the USA started with Bush.
The over taxation started when Bush financed two wars by printing money instead of cutting spending to pay for them.
Ever since Reagan, the government has continued to avoid raising taxes. But they do not cut spending either. The debt that has accumulated over the past eight years is now taxing everyone.
During the Bush administration, the bankers and politicians were taxed little but still wanted more money. Their greed has placed America in a very bad situation. Yes, Obama has increased the deficit and if McCain was president he would have no choice either. The next president will also increase the deficit because he /she will be elected because of promises of tax cuts/breaks. The government keeps spending and giving money away so it becomes larger and larger. The government needs a very big trimming.
The current republicans and democrats will not do what is necessary and if a president ever tried, the American people would whine like little babies that just had their candy jar removed.
As long as there are only two major parties and those parties being republican and democrat, expect the same promises; tax breaks, lower taxes, increased spending and huge deficits.
# 16 I’m not sure if he is or not. The question is going to be how people see what he has done come election time. If things go as badly as they may he might not be able to beat a three headed dog from Hades. Carter had that problem. I so see Obama as being much like Carter: smart, articulate, a nice guy with high standards relating to some issues but not all issues including Acorn, misuse of public funds, and political deal making. His problem is when the rubber meets the road disaster occurs.
#22 Hell, even Bush wasn’t trying to destroy the nation, only all parts of the government not dealing with shooting people.
If Obama was actually trying to make a national health system I would be waving a sign to jack up my taxes. Government run health systems are cheaper, so you’d save money compared to profit driven health insurance.
Obama’s biggest failure is to shy away from the bully pulpit. He is a good orator, and could focus public anger to pressure Congress to get things done. Since he does not I can only conclude he’s not interested. In his absence the tea bag’d people are a credible, if ignorant, alternative.
bac said “Ever since Reagan, the government has continued to avoid raising taxes. But they do not cut spending either. The debt that has accumulated over the past eight years is now taxing everyone.”
George Bush Sr. raised taxes to balance the budget and deal with a recession. Partisans from both sides jumped on him and he lose the election. He left office with things in good shape.
It’s been an era of populist, gutless policies ever since.