Nonetheless,
he continues to present himself as a reasonable antagonist for the Russians and
the Tea Party, a position that may reflect reality but is not getting him much
traction in foreign relations or domestic policy.
Even
his admirers are left to wonder whether Obama’s even disposition and
professorial bent are handicapping him in the White House. Would being more
devious and willing to get down into the mud with antagonists work better?
Politics
has never been rational but is now less so than ever. To be effective in this
atmosphere, you have to be more than right on the issues. A bit of the low
cunning of LBJ and even Nixon, without their failure to understand boundaries,
might not be amiss.
Take
the Snowden flap, for example. Why did the White House from the start inflate
his importance rather than dismiss him as a low-level criminal and concentrate
on the issue rather than the man? Wasn’t it foreseeable that Putin might use
him as a pawn?
Take
the Tea Party for another. Against all odds in 1948, Harry Truman lambasted the
“do nothing, good for nothing” GOP Congress and won an unlikely election. Can’t
Obama see that, in politics, you can blast your opposition but keep smiling for
photographs while trying to make deals with them off camera?
When
Daniel Patrick Moynihan observed 20 years ago that we were in an era of “Defining
Deviancy Down,” he was understating where politics was going.
“We
are getting used to a lot of behavior that is not good for us,” the late New
York Senator wrote in his now-famous American
Scholar article, arguing that society keeps adjusting for the amount of
unacceptable conduct it can tolerate.
He
pointed out that, in 1929, the killing of seven gangsters in Chicago became the
stuff of legend while half a century later “Los Angeles has the equivalent of a
St. Valentine’s Day Massacre every weekend.”
What
Barack Obama might concentrate on now is the difference between being deviant
and devious.
He
may pride himself on being neither, but as JFK said, life is unfair and you
have to make some hard choices to survive politically.
Not until he shows more heart and anger.
Update: Maureen Dowd sums up Obama’sapproach: “There is no moral high ground that he does not seek to occupy. As
with drones and gay marriage, he seems peeved that we were insufficiently
patient with his own private study of the matter. Why won’t the country agree
to entrust itself to his fine mind?”
Not until he shows more heart and anger.
No comments:
Post a Comment