President Obama: Legislator, Negotiator, Fighter

I find it amusing watching pundits and bloggers trying to capture a meme about President Obama at any given moment over the last few years. You'd think that eventually they would see that human beings can rarely be captured by a soundbite and instead are much more complex in both their strengths and foibles. President Obama is no exception.

Of course the latest meme to surface is that the President has somehow turned over a new leaf and become a populist fighter against the intransigent Republicans instead of being an accommodationist believer in bi-partisanship. A couple of weeks ago I challenged the idea that populism is somehow new to this President by showing how he's been saying the same things all along.

What I've seen over the years is that every time President Obama comes out swinging, there are a host of people who suggest that he has "finally" abandoned the idea of bi-partisanship. Many heard that in his speech in Ohio where he took on the Republicans for their obstruction and made the recess appointment of Richard Cordray to the CFPA. But take a listen to what he actually said (most people have quoted the second paragraph while leaving out the first).

So I’ve said before that I want to look for every possible opportunity to work with Congress to move this country forward and create jobs. I’m going to look for every opportunity to try to bridge the partisan divide and get things done -- because that’s what the American people need right now...

But when Congress refuses to act, and as a result, hurts our economy and puts our people at risk, then I have an obligation as President to do what I can without them. I’ve got an obligation to act on behalf of the American people. And I’m not going to stand by while a minority in the Senate puts party ideology ahead of the people that we were elected to serve. Not with so much at stake, not at this make-or-break moment for middle-class Americans. We’re not going to let that happen.

(Emphasis mine)

You see what he did there? He left the door open.

So to those who think bi-partisanship is the enemy of liberal politics, pay attention. This is a President who is playing a long game guided by his North Star. He'll employ the tactics dictated by the situation to reach that goal. That means that when he has a large majority in both Houses of Congress - he'll engage in the legislative battle of getting the best stimulus, health care reform, Wall Street reform, etc. he can. And when Republicans have a House majority and are holding the world economy hostage to their extremist agenda, he'll outsmart them in terms of negotiations. And when its time to take on Osama bin Laden or Republicans who are just being plain stupid in ways that pose a threat to the American people, he'll take them on as the steely fighter.

If some day - either through the demise of the Republican Party as we now know it today or through a process where they finally come to their senses - the possibility of joining together in a bi-partisan way to solve the country's great challenges presents itself, he'll be ready to play that role as well.

I suspect that history will be more capable of assessing the different facets of this President than our current react-in-the-moment news media. But perhaps by taking a broader look ourselves we can calm the tides of reaction that well up. In doing so, we'll learn more about what he means when he talks about being able to see the long game.

Obama and Panetta to address military spending today

Before the Republican howls over recess appointments have begun to quiet, President Obama is set to up the decibel level even higher today when he joins Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to make an important announcement about reductions in defense spending.

The Obama administration will unveil a "more realistic" vision for the military on Thursday, with plans to cut tens of thousands of ground troops and invest more in air and sea power at a time of fiscal restraint, officials familiar with the plans said on Wednesday.

The strategic review of U.S. security interests will also emphasize an American presence in Asia, with less attention overall to Europe, Africa and Latin America alongside slower growth in the Pentagon's budget, the officials said.

Though specific budget cut and troop reduction figures are not set to be announced on Thursday, officials confirmed to Reuters they would amount to a 10-15 percent decline in Army and Marine Corps numbers over the next decade, translating to tens of thousands of troops.

The most profound shift in the strategic review is an acceptance that the United States, even with the world's largest military budget, cannot afford to maintain the ground troops to fight more than one major war at once. That is a move away from the "win-win" strategy that has dominated Pentagon funding decisions for decades.

This is the follow-through from President Obama on the promise he made back in April 2011 in his speech about fiscal responsibility to reduce defense spending by $400 billion over the next 10 years. So it does not include the cuts that are scheduled to kick in next year as part of the debt ceiling deal.

If you're looking for an issue progressives have rallied around for decades, none has been more consistent than our commitment to reigning in the military industrial complex. To put it in context, here's a graph showing our military spending vs the rest of the world.



Today President Obama will put forward his plan on how we can begin to address this progressive goal.

What's really at stake with the recess appointments

With all of the Republican obstruction of President Obama's nominees these last couple of years, the question becomes "why did he chose appointments to the CFPA and NLRB as the place to take this stand?" Many pundits are seeing this as the end of the President's attempts at bipartisanship due to the intransigence coming from the other side of the isle. There may be some truth to that. But I think it goes much deeper.

Most of us are aware that the Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA) was created as part of the Dodd/Frank Wall Street reform. Cordray will be the inaugural director of this newly created agency set up to protect consumers. The Republican's objections aren't about Cordray or his qualifications. They have promised to stop any nominee from being appointed to head this agency until its functions are basically neutered. That is a VERY different situation than the one where Democrats objected to George W. Bush's nomination of John Bolton as Ambassador to the UN. The equivalent would have been an objection to ANY appointment until our relationship with the UN was either terminated or essentially neutered.

The same is basically true of the recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). President Obama has nominated people for 3 openings there. One of them, Terence Flynn (who has served as the NLRB counsel), is a Republican. But the Republican's obstruction of these appointments has nothing to do with the specific people involved.

The board, which referees labor-management disputes and oversees union elections, has been a prime target for Republicans and business groups since it filed a controversial lawsuit last year that accused Boeing of illegally retaliating against union members.

That case was dismissed last month after Boeing and the union settled their differences. But Republicans are still incensed over the board’s approval last month of sweeping new rules to speed up the union election process, making it easier for unions to gain new members.

Obama’s action prevents the board from losing much of its power for the rest of the year. The NLRB is supposed to have five members, but it has operated for months with only three. This week, it is down to just two members, after Democrat Craig Becker completed his term. The agency is not allowed to conduct regular business with only two members.

(Emphasis mine)

As people note the history of recess appointments, lets remember that those nominees have usually been blocked due to objections to the specific person involved. This time its different...we're talking about a minority in the Senate attempting to disable the functioning of agencies that have been approved via legislation.

It should come as no surprise to any of us that Republicans in this Congress are taking their obstruction into whole new extremes. And its important that we keep the focus there when talking about what President Obama did yesterday with these recess appointments.

It was a good day to be an Obamabot!

First there were the Iowa caucus results.

Think about it. Ron Paul’s going to spend the next two or three months attacking Mitt Romney. Rick Santorum’s going to spend the next two or three months claiming he’s the real conservative, not Mitt Romney. And Newt Gingrich is going to spend the next six months, or six years, getting his revenge by calling Mitt Romney a liar, or worse. And the longer they direct their fire at each other, the better it is for the Obama campaign.

Meanwhile, President Obama can focus on doing his job as president — fighting for tax cuts for the middle class — while his campaign continues to snare and squirrel away campaign cash for their big battle in November against Bain Capital.

Good for Barack Obama. He was one of the big winners in Iowa, without even campaigning.

Then came McCain's endorsement of Romney, which was clumsily timed to coincide with President Obama's speech in Ohio.



I LOVE what Jed Lewison did with this one.

And now you know Mitt Romney's answer to the question: "Where were you when President Obama was appointing the nation's first consumer watchdog?" The answer: getting the endorsement of the guy who Obama beat the last time around.

And finally, there were those recess appointments...Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Agency and 3 members to the NLRB. Of course all of that was followed by Republican hissy fits (always fun to watch!)

Greg Sargent summed up the results very well.

Obama’s decision to do this in such a high profile way may swing the spotlight back towards his ongoing push for the middle class, which the White House hopes to contrast with ongoing GOP primary infighting. The outcry from Republicans will draw more attention to their role as defenders of financial institutions against consumers. In keeping with the new “we can’t wait” for Congress strategy, Obama seems determined to demonstrate a willingness to take whatever steps are necessary to circumvent it and to exercise power unilaterally on behalf of the economy and the middle class.

Game On!!!!

Oh yeah, I'm lovin' being an Obamabot today.

;-)

Guess who no one is talking about today

Sad Ron Paul

Major developments in negotiations to end the indefinite war (updated)

I'm going to be following the negotiations currently underway between the U.S. and our allies, Afghanistan and the Taliban. For some background about why this story is so important, read my post titled Ending the indefinite war. I'll also be collecting all of these stories at the tab up top with the same name.

Yesterday there were some significant developments in the negotiations. In exchange for the agreement to release some prisoners from Guantanamo, the Taliban agreed to open an office in Qatar.

The US has agreed in principle to release high-ranking Taliban officials from Guantánamo Bay in return for the Afghan insurgents' agreement to open a political office for peace negotiations in Qatar, the Guardian has learned...

The releases would be to reciprocate for Tuesday's announcement from the Taliban that they are prepared to open a political office in Qatar to conduct peace negotiations "with the international community" – the most significant political breakthrough in ten years of the Afghan conflict...

Nasr, now a professor at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, said the Taliban announcement on the opening of an office in Qatar was a dramatic breakthrough.

"If it had not happened then the idea of reconciliation would have been completely finished. The Qatar office is akin to the Taliban forming a Sinn Féin, a political wing to conduct negotiations," Nasr said, but added: "The next phase will need concessions on both sides. This doesn't mean we are now on autopilot to peace."

Michael Semple, a former EU envoy in Afghanistan who has maintained contact with senior Taliban figures, agreed that the deal represented a critical moment.

"This is at last a real process," Semple, now at Harvard University, said. "There is a long list of things we don't have and there has been no progress on substantive issues. But now there is a certain amount of momentum. Every discussion over the past couple of years has been heavy on western enthusiasm with nothing substantial from the other side."...

Western diplomats hope the opening of an office in Qatar will also lessen Pakistan's control of the Taliban. Pakistan plays host to most of the Taliban leadership, which it sees as an important bargaining counter in negotiations over the future of the region.

It is critically important that we keep an eye on this story. Not just because President Obama is taking HUGE risks to finally end this indefinite war. But also because you can bet that the right wing is on this story. As an example, the conservative blog PowerLine published a story about this same article titled Obama's Surrender of Afghanistan Continues Apace.

As we watch this story unfold, we need to know the long game our President is dealing with in this situation and be ready to defend the steps he's taking to get there.

UPDATE: Once again, Matt Osborne is on this story as well.

Blame it on Bush/Cheney

I've read some of the analysis about the Iowa Republican caucus results and, interestingly enough, the person I agree with the most is Erick Erickson at RedState. I suspect that's because, more than any pundit, he has his finger on the pulse of the not-Romney 75%.

...the reason the GOP is having such a chaotic primary fight has nothing to do with the tea party. Frankly, it has nothing to do with the bulk of the GOP not wanting Romney.

The reason this Republican primary season is so chaotic is because George W. Bush failed to have a successor. Had President Bush had a Vice President to run for President, Bush would have undoubtedly made different policy decisions, but even aside from that there would have been an ascertainable front runner coming from the Bush administration to win or lose.

I remember during the last year or so of the Bush/Cheney administration wondering who they would anoint as their successors. But it never happened. Instead, we saw a complete breakdown of their domestic policies with the crash of our economy, just as we had witnessed the same from their foreign policies.

As I've said many times before, Bush/Cheney left the Republican Party in the shambles of failure on every front. They had a choice to make after that...rethink their policies or double-down on the failures. They chose the later. Not only did they do that, they catered to their extreme base in order to obstruct everything the Democrats tried to do and to gin up enough rage to win the 2010 midterms. Those decisions are now coming back to haunt them. And neither the base nor the establishment is happy right now as the later tries to reign things in for a general election.

One more thing I agree with Erickson about:

But by God Mitt Romney may now get the political beating everyone has been expecting him to get. Newt Gingrich has nothing left to lose. He can go Newtlear against the guy he sees as having destroyed him. Newt Gingrich can unleash unmitigated hell against MItt Romney and just like the attacks on Newt were true, they’ll all be true about MItt Romney too.

This Republican self-destruction isn't over yet...not by a long shot.