Monday, December 6, 2010

Are Liberals Really Turning on Obama?

There’s nothing unusual about sitting presidents disappointing their more doctrinaire ideological comrades. I remember conservatives speculating about Reagan’s senility while he was negotiating arms reductions with Gorbachev, liberals shaking their heads when Clinton signed a Republican welfare reform bill into law and conservatives reaching for the Valium when Bush nominated Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court.  But nothing has prepared me for the unconcealed contempt that liberal media heavyweights are starting to shower on Obama.

Here, for example, is what Frank Rich had to say about Obama in his column in yesterday’s New York Times:
“THOSE desperate to decipher the baffling Obama presidency could do worse than consult an article titled ‘Understanding Stockholm Syndrome’ in the online archive of The F.B.I. Law Enforcement Bulletin. It explains that hostage takers are most successful at winning a victim’s loyalty if they temper their brutality with a bogus show of kindness. Soon enough, the hostage will start concentrating on his captors’ ‘good side’ and develop psychological characteristics to please them — ‘dependency; lack of initiative; and an inability to act, decide or think.’”
And here’s what Dan Rather had to say today on MSNBC about what the deal over tax cuts being worked out between the White House and congressional Republicans portends for Obama’s political future:



Could it really be that a substantial part of the Democratic base is prepared to abandon the sitting Democratic president who passed the most ambitious social policy reform of the last 45 years over a deal on the Bush tax cuts?

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

I think Rather's comment on Obama having 4-6 months to turn his image around sounds about right.

Yeoman Farmer said...

It's the fact that they are the BUSH tax cuts that has these guys up in arms. I like Ezra Klein's has a more sympathic interpretation of the tax deal at http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/12/can_the_white_house_win_in_201.html#more

Mean Voter said...

First of all, Dan Rather has no credibility with anyone. Secondly, I think there is a better chance that the recent deal on taxes will usher in a new era for Obama. Maybe people will view him as willing to compromise, willing to address the nation's needs now, rather than barrel through an agenda that may be liberal, but is not what the country needs now. I can't believe any serious challenger could emerge for the Democratic nomination who will argue THAT TAXES SHOULD HAVE GONE UP ON EVERYONE DURING A RECESSION. Maybe Dennis Kucinich might say that. Surely Paul Krugman will. But will people vote for someone like that? No way.