A Need to Lower Expectations About Obama

We had grown to expect nothing from George W. Bush. Worse, we weren't that surprised when the Bush Administration, in its last two months, was astoundingly negligent in addressing our rapidly sinking economy. Meanwhile, the media and a segment of the public, expected Barack Obama to begin acting like the President even before he took office. In fact, Obama, as President-elect, took a number of steps to send signals aimed at the economy.

Since his Jan. 20th Inaugural, President Obama and his Administration have poured all their energy into wrestling with the economic crisis. Yesterday, House and Senate leaders reached agreement on Obama's $789 billion stimulus package. Still, the struggle continues. The uncertainty continues as to whether these actions in Washington will improve the economy.
It all makes me wonder:

Shouldn't we lower our expectations about what Obama can do about the economy, and, what he can do as President, in general?

Public and media expectations seem to have gone from one extreme (Bush) to the other (Obama) Obama's first three weeks should remind everyone that the President cannot and does not control much what happens nationally.
While the media has focused a lot on Obama's "ups" and "downs," they have not focused enough on some details and undercurrents, including the following:

1) Most media coverage of Obama has lacked context in that it has disregarded the incredible "mess" that he inherited from Bush -- a more pressing, overwhelming combination of crises than any President in modern history. Think about it: Obama's first days in office have been spent trying to win support for his first legislation - which happened to be the largest financial spending/tax cut deal in the history of the country! Yet, when House and most Senate Republicans didn't respond to Obama's overtures for support, some journalists concluded that Obama's attempt for a more bipartisan approach has failed - and, would be shelved now. Give me a break. Obama has been President three weeks.


2) The Republicans' stubborn position, if anything, illustrated a pattern that has prevailed in Washington for the past eight years, and, back to the Clinton years. Both parties are accustomed to spouting their partisan arguments without even trying to listen to each other, without true debate that rewards the merit of arguments and without genuine efforts to compromise and get results. Politicians in both parties are not held accountable for their unwillingness to work together. It seems Obama was accurate when he said, at his nationally televised press conference, that "old habits die hard." Hopefully, he'll convince others to "start over."

3) House Democrats, meanwhile, didn't do much to move things along. Did anyone notice how few House Democrats surfaced publicly - on TV, for instance, to vigorously support the stimulus package?

It was as if Obama was doing most of the "selling" while Democrats were griping and whining in the background about how hard it was to concede significant ground on parts of the stimulus.
For days, Republicans kept a constant attack on parts of the bill they claimed were wasteful "pork" while many Democrats didn't fight back with any force or effectiveness. Obama did the heavy lifting. The small minority of Republicans stole the platform from the large majorities in the House and Senate. If this dynamic continues, it will probably drive Obama crazy.

4) Obama's performance at his first press conference was about as sharp a contrast from Bush as imaginable. As the President gave his answers, he thoughtfully described the pros and cons of arguments and approached topics from different angles. He was truly thinking spontaneously as he gave each reply about the issues raised.

5) One of Obama's tendencies at the press conference was a bit troubling: Many of his answers were way too long, and, I mean much longer than necessary. The President appeared oblivious or insensitive to what impact his lengthy replies might have on his audience, which, after all, included millions of Americans watching at home. To me, when a politician rambles in this kind of extreme fashion, it can often suggest an egomania or a seeming "delusion" of grandeur. When I worked in New York state government and Mario Cuomo was governor, I noticed that Cuomo often gave strikingly lengthy opening statements (lectures) to the press, and answers that dominated the event and constrained reporters' chance to probe. I'm not suggesting Obama lacks control of his ego; however, I've noticed, on occasion, that he seems unaware that his replies are becoming not only expansive, but excessive.

6) Another point about the press conference: Why did Obama pre-select which specific reporters to call on? That was unusual. One journalist speculated in an article afterward that perhaps Obama wanted to "reward" the reporters on his list. Whatever the motivation, I hope he does not do that again. It removes spontaneity, excludes reporters and is too controlling.

7) I mentioned the lack of context in coverage of Obama's first three weeks. For example, within a period of two or three days, Obama, in reply to a quesion at his press conference, discussed his intention to look for openings that might result in starting a new diplomatic relationship with Iran. He indicated - as he promised in his campaign - that he is open to moving in a new direction with Iran, if Iran sends promising signals in return. The next day, Iranian President Ahmadinejad made a fairly positive comment in response & seemed open to listening to Obama. Shortly after that, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, followed up on Obama's remarks, by mentioning potential improvements in relations with Iran, but she seemed a bit more sober about it. It's too early to tell what Obama's signals on Iran mean, but, they certainly represent a total break from the Bush era - and, I'd argue, any such communication is better than virtually no "open or positive" signal during eight years under Bush.

8) Much was said about Tom Daschle's withdrawal from his nomination as Secretary of Health and Human Services. The press analyzed it primarily as a significant setback to Obama and tried to identify how it happened. Yet, the press overlooked an interesting, revealing detail smack in the middle of the episode. This detail was that after Daschle's tax problems became public, Obama remarked publicly that he "absolutely" supported Daschle's continuing nomination. The media let Obama off the hook for this by not questioning why he'd choose to not cut ties with Daschle at that moment. Obama was doing exactly what he labled as unacceptable -- giving special treatment to Daschle by downplaying his tax mistakes, which would get other Americans in trouble. I think it was probably just a typical omission by the press, which devoted "pack-mentality" coverage to that incident.

9) Don't you get the sense that the Obama team is rushing to get a little too much done at this early stage? Granted, the economy warrants urgent attention, but Secretary of Treasury Tim Geithner's Feb. 10th presention about another huge bailout for banks drew tremendous criticism after Geithner offered no details in his bailout plan. My question is: If he was not ready to offer details, why did he feel compelled to give his speech Feb. 10th? Maybe he, and the Administration, should have said candidly that more time was needed to prepare the plan.

10) If one tries to imagine how the past five or six Presidents would be faring right now in handling the economic crisis, two wars and other problems, I think it reminds one of Obama's relative strengths. George W. Bush, we know would've been overmatched completely. Bill Clinton probably would have been knowledgeable & articulate on it, but, would he have been as credible when discussing ethical lapses on Wall Street? Bush Sr. would not have been as convincing in presenting arguments. Reagan would've been told what to do by his top aides and brought an ideological bias to the whole topic. In any event, it's good to have a young, energetic, highly intelligent, calm, reasonable President. At least, it seems that way after three short weeks.