I subscribe to a product put out by my
employer which shows 4 foreclosures and 1 sale in my neighborhood for
November (not counting any that happen today, of course). So a recovery
by mid-year (June is summer-6th month)? Or will it be a double dip by
Summer?
David
"Free
speech is meant to
protect unpopular speech. Popular speech, by definition, needs no
protection."—Neal Boortz
[email protected] wrote:
Ernie:
Yeah, we won't know about Obama's reputation, anything that
really matters,
until Spring. At the soonest, early 2010. At that, even if he
still is sliding in public opinion,
there still could be a rebound by Summer or Fall is the economy
recovers.
And it is possible to concede some of Klein's points easily
enough. However, I heard
one worthwhile criticism that may well be important, namely
that America's allies
are unconvinced that Obama is really in their corner and also
unconvinced that he has
the backbone to stand up to mutual enemies.
But we shall see. This is still the last month or so of 2009.
Billy
------------------------------------------------------
In a message dated 11/30/2009 10:03:35 A.M. Pacific Standard
Time, [email protected] writes: I think he's generally right -- it is way too early to pass
judgement on Obama, though I think the mistakes are real. Still, he's
got a point that Democrats start out ambitious which makes this an
institutional problem for them, which isn't necessarily an indicator of
future performance.
I think we'll learn a lot more on Tuesday...
-- Ernie P.
P.S. DRB, I know you despise Klein, but I do think he is more rational
than most leftists :-)
> Of the past seven Presidents, the two Bushes rank at the top in
popularity after one year, while Obama and Bill Clinton rank at the
bottom, with Jimmy Carter close by. There is a reason for that.
Democrats come to office eager to govern the heck out of the country
http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1942832,00.html
Obama's 'Mistakes': Way Too Early to Judge
By Joe Klein
Over the past few weeks, Barack Obama has been criticized for the
following: He didn't go to Berlin for the 20th anniversary of the
Wall's coming down. He didn't make a forceful enough statement on the
30th anniversary of the U.S. diplomats' being taken hostage in Iran. He
didn't show sufficient mournfulness, at first, when the Fort Hood
shootings took place, and he was namby-pamby about the possibility that
the shootings were an act of jihad. He has spent too little time
focusing on unemployment. He bowed too deeply before the Japanese
Emperor. He allowed the Chinese to block the broadcast of his Shanghai
town-hall meeting. He allowed the Chinese President to bar questions at
their joint press conference (a moment memorably satirized by Saturday
Night Live). He didn't come back with any diplomatic victories from
Asia. He allowed Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the other 9/11 plotters to
be tried in the U.S. criminal-justice system rather than by the
military. He has dithered too long on Afghanistan. He has devoted too
much attention to — and given congressional Democrats too much
control over — health care reform, an issue that is peripheral to a
majority of Americans.
And all this has led to a dangerous slippage in the polls, it is said,
a sense that his presidential authority is ebbing. (See who's who in
Barack Obama's White House.)
As a fully licensed pundit, I have the authority to weigh in here ...
but I demur. Oh, I could sling opinions about every one of the events
cited above — some were unfortunate — but it would matter only if I
could discern a pattern that illuminates Obama's presidency. The most
obvious pattern, however, is the media's tendency to get overwrought
about almost anything. Why, for example, is the 20th anniversary of the
Berlin Wall demolition so crucial that it requires a President's
presence? Which recent U.S. President has gotten the Chinese to agree
to anything big? (In fact, Obama has secured significant diplomatic
cooperation from the Chinese on North Korea, Afghanistan and Pakistan.)
Was his deep bow indicative of anything other than his physical
fitness? (My midsection, sadly, prevents the appearance of
obsequiousness in such circumstances.)
Stepping back a bit, I do see a metapattern that extends over the 40
years since Richard Nixon's Southern strategy began the drift toward
more ideological political parties: Democrats have tough first years in
the presidency. Of the past seven Presidents, the two Bushes rank at
the top in popularity after one year, while Obama and Bill Clinton rank
at the bottom, with Jimmy Carter close by. There is a reason for that.
Democrats come to office eager to govern the heck out of the country.
They take on impossible issues, like budget-balancing and health care
reform. They run into roadblocks — from their own unruly ranks as
well as from Republicans. They get lost in the details. A tax cut is
much easier to explain than a tax increase. A foreign policy based in
bluster — railing against an "axis of evil" — is easier to sell
than a foreign policy based in nuance. Of course, external events count
a lot: the ratings of Bushes I and II were bolstered, respectively, by
the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the flattening of the World
Trade Center. Reagan's rating — 53% and headed south — was dampened
by a deepening recession. (See TIME's Person of the Year: Barack Obama.)
So it is way too early to make pronouncements on Obama's fate. One
pattern that can be limned from the recent overseas controversies is
that this President has a tendency to err in the direction of respect
toward other countries. This is a witting reaction to the Bush
Administration's tendency to diss our allies and insult — or invade
— our enemies. It is a long game, which will yield results, or not,
over time. After a first year spent demonstrating a new comity, Obama
has gained the global credibility to get tough — on Iran, for example
— in his second year. But the real evaluation of Obama's debut must
wait for the results of the two biggest problems he's tackling: his
decision on Afghanistan and the congressional attempt to pass health
care reform. And even here, it will be difficult to render judgment
immediately — as difficult as it was to judge Clinton's decision to
spend his political capital on deficit reduction in his 1993 economic
plan, a triumph that didn't become apparent for nearly five years.
The one Asian image that resonates with me isn't the bow, but the
President alone on the Great Wall. That image — the noble loner —
is clearly one the White House wants to project. But it raises the
specter of isolation. Most Presidents have a significant other when it
comes to policy. Bush Junior had Cheney; Clinton had Hillary; Bush the
Elder had James Baker; Nixon had Kissinger. Obama's conservative
critics poke fun at his overweening ego, but I suspect that the
President's need to find an alter ego, an intellectual equal — in
addition to the First Lady — who can challenge his decisions and
demeanor (in private, with the bark off), is the biggest adjustment he
has to make now.
See pictures of Barack Obama taken by everyday Americans.
•
•
• Click to Print
•
• Find this article at:
• http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1942832,00.html
Copyright © 2009 Time Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole
or in part without permission is prohibited.
Privacy Policy|Add TIME Headlines to your Site|Contact Us|Customer
Service
_______________________________________________
Centroids mailing list: [email protected]
http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com
Archives at
http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/
_______________________________________________
Centroids mailing list: [email protected]
http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com
Archives at http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/
|
