Of course, despite the fact that just like how all of a sudden people are Constitutional lawyers I guess they seem to be okay with the idea that they are somehow experts on the history of Chicago politics, I fail to see any kind of death-grip Chicago "thug politics"has had on America. It's mentioned apocraphally as buying Kennedy's presidency, and then nowadays because some of Obama's staff are from the area. And, of course, nothing in between.
But even more interesting is that just like the unsettling fact that Congress has actually been productive, lost in all the "Obama should hang himself!" nonsense is the fact that he's actually doing a good job:
In America, it’s hard to pass laws. If you’re passing some, and staying more popular than the other political party, then you’re doing pretty well. The greatest presidents, of course, exceed that standard. But “he’s not getting as much done as Lincoln” is a long way from “he’s a failure and needs to ditch the core of his team.”As usual, the slow grinding gears of actual government go unnoticed while people like Sarah Palin go around under the kleiglights 24/7, and then people like me talk about her going under the kleiglights 24/7. As I've said before, it's comforting knowing that no matter what nonsense I blather, there are actual adults in charge of things.
10 comments:
"productive" and "doing a good job" are not equivalent.
An executive is judged on any number of factors, and they tend to be relatively straightforward.
What would "doing a bad job" mean to you? What metrics might you use?
Then, use your subjective analysis. What did you want to see and where is the administration on those matters?
Understandably, your comfort is paramount. I glean that your objective measure is "not Bush" and your subjective measure is "not Bush." It's a low bar. If you feel under those indicia the administration is doing ducky, cool.
But your inability to fathom that others - left, right and center - think the administration is sucking eggs on an objective and subjective analysis puts into question your ability to fairly evaluate the situation.
my point isn't that Congress or Obama is particularly doing what I personally prefer (you know my politics make Obama look like Stalin), my point is that lost in the day to day hyperbolic media ("Palin's talking! Beck's crying! Stewart's funny!! Healthcarehealthcarehealthcarehealthcare!!!) is that (presumably, in my eyes) good stuff IS actually happening, which nobody (myself included) usually notices.
A progressive commenter on Yglesias I think makes a fair point:
"I’m pretty sure the presidential campaign didn’t center on K-12 education or broadband internet. The truth is, on the big items important to progressives (health care reform, cap and trade, gay equality, immigration, etc.), he has been an abject failure. Yes, it’s only Year 2, but the changes of major movement on these issues goes down, not up, with each passing day. Citing the successful confirmation of a SC justice who may well be to Souter’s right with a 60-vote majority in the Senate as a plus rather than a minus shows how low the bar has become."
It's one that you'd be much wiser to address than your created straw man -- the hyperbolic media as interpreted by a hyperbolic blogger.
also, just like with evaluating which governmental spending is "wasteful," it's probably true that governmental "success" is mostly evaluated by "doing what I personally like."
I'm not sure that most people give a shit about the number of bills passed.
Being productive is not content neutral.
Obama was elected overwhelmingly. he has historic majorities. And he promised a hell of a lot, both specifically and rhetorically.
Let me ask you. As an adult, what do you consider his ten biggest mistakes?
If it helps, and it may, I could list the administration's 10 biggest content neutral mistakes just in the area of national security, or palin's 10 biggest mistakes since the election, in case you're concerned that this is an ideological gotcha!
im on record (in this very post, actually) claiming myself to be part of the hyperbole problem. Im human, we like sexy loud issues, the squeaky wheel etc.
which is also why the "big items" have been so hard...because they're "big items." I'm glad about the K-12 education stuff, but was that being splashed on the front pages every day? No. Healthcare, for instance, was. Which means people are going to fight for or against it, which means it's not gonna all of a sudden show up on the back of presidential bubblegum card. yes, we all wanna be able to hit the 0-2 slider; but the 2-0 fastball needs to be hit too. and any claim otherwise suggests your own bias re: what's "important," what "the bar is" etc etc.
Hyperbole aside (a reason I haven't watched political TV for 6 years), there may be a direct correlation between sagging poll numbers and a journeyman 11-13 record, especially for a Yankee.
That's how I look at it. The reports were ecstatic. His arm was supposed to be blazing fastball and solid movement, and the team was stacked this year.
And he's 9-13.
And you soberly tell us, "Hey, no one talks about those 9 wins."
well, it's only the 3rd inning. do i need to bring up the "Reagan sucked his first year and now is a God" bumper sticker again?
No. It's the first year of a four year deal.
And he may well have a standout second, third and fourth year.
But to be fair, and move you away from the hyperbole you seek to avoid, what do you think would be indicative of a 15-10 record in his second year?
well, anything involving the healthcare bill passing along with unemployment dropping would be pretty big (which would of course be somewhat dependent on a second stimulus that everyone will claim to be against.)
Post a Comment