New York Magazine: Debunking Obama’s So-Called Leadership Failure

Various fiscal scolds have been scolding President Obama for failing to use his mind-control powers to force Republicans to accept a tax hike. Michael Bloomberg sadly attributes the failure of the supercommittee to agree on reducing the deficit to a failure of “leadership.” (Say, are there any leaders we could turn to? Perhaps somebody with a large bank account and a penchant for catering to the social and economic predilections of elites?)

The notion that Obama’s “leadership” could have persuaded Republicans to accept a tax increase seems strange. Republicans, I have noticed, tend not to like Obama very much. His endorsement does not carry a great deal of weight with them. That was why the administration stayed in the background when Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson developed their deficit plan.

When deficit scolds complained that he failed to embrace them openly, Obama tried a different tack when the next bipartisan deficit commission came around. That was the Senate’s “Gang of Six.” Obama decided to openly tout the plan. Did that work? No, it did not. A Republican aide, probably accurately, blamed Obama’s endorsement for the kiss of death. (“The President killed any chance of its success by 1) embracing it. 2) hailing the fact that it increases taxes. 3) Saying it mirrors his own plan.”)

Okay, so if Obama openly endorses a bipartisan plan, he’s killing it. And if he keeps his distance, he’s also killing it. What if he tries to directly negotiate a deficit reduction plan behind closes doors? Well, Obama did that, too, this last summer. Republicans opposed it as well.

Rest of the article is here....http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/11/debunking-obamas-so-called-leadership-failure.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+nymag%2Fintel+%28Daily+Intelligencer+-+New+York+Magazine%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

from the right, but to hear these same "failure of leadership" claims coming from supposed allies, seems freaky to me, because they should know better.

he has tried. Bloomberg lost any chance at a Presidential bid when he came out if favour of the himself and the 1%.

lying, manipulating, deceiving, breaking laws, etc.

it's that he's a "black leader" . . . :-(

Claim he is dictator who is forcing tons of new legislation down everyone's throats! They are truly confused!

...And that goes for many here on DU as well! DU has been crying &screaming how Obama was playing checkers while the GOP was playing chess when it came to the deficit fights...Obama always plays chess & understands what many Democrats have failed to learn over the past 30yrs that you have to think long term & take what you can even if it requires compromise. Ending DADT was clearly worth two more years of Bush Tax Cuts!

How can somebody who doesn't know how to lead be a "dictator" too? :shrug:

The professional criticizers will blame Obama no matter what he does. Idiots.

its his favorite thing in the world. He loves it when they cave and he hates it when they fight. The ones who cave are sensible to Chait, and he sees the ones who fight as silly.

nice: it wasn't going to happen then and it ain't going to happen now. And the present enemy is just as virulent imo. :patriot:

repuke loudmouths slag our (black, Democratic) President.

Media regurgitates the words of its owners.

Media watchers ingest the lukewarm chunks--pre-chewed, pre-digested--suitable for audiences unused to independent deduction. For (fallacious) seasoning there is limpbut, o'lielly and Fux and fiends to add a nice hot spicy touch of rage.

Who owns the media owns the conversation. (" Whoever controls the media, the images, controls the culture.--Allen Ginsberg")



Change happens incrementally, and we are still walking a tightrope, but it pisses me off to continually see mass media jump on disinformation and ignore the successful work he's doing.

I've gotten sick and tired of the Republicans' "Obama can't/won't lead" meme. If anything, I think that Obama tries too hard most of the time to work with the Republicans when it's clear (or should be) that they simply won't do anything he proposes no matter how many olive branches he may offer to them or how many of their ideas he includes within his proposals. It's gotten to the point where he could declare himself a Republican tomorrow and the Republicans would probably immediately change their party affiliation to Democrats. With that kind of mindless intransigence and/or obstruction, how in the hell can he ever be expected to get them on board with ANYTHING? :banghead: He's tried being actively involved and it doesn't accomplish anything (see 2009-present), he tries to stay above the fray and let members of Congress fulfill their constitutionally mandated duties and that hasn't work (see 2009-present). So, what do all these "deficit scolds" and Republicans accusing of him "not leading" want him to do, really????

The pattern should be clear to even the most clueless individuals by now: Republicans demand that he step in and help Congress do its job, the Republicans attack and smear him and obstruct anything from happening (the House is controlled by the Republicans and have a filibuster chokehold on the Senate) then when things don't get done, they attack him some more for "not leading" and the media just blames "both sides" for not being reasonable (and usually even President Obama to some extent for being ineffectual).
It's enough to make you want to rip your hair out!
:nuke:

:kick:

:kick: