In his Wall Street Journal column James Taranto has belated advice for the president in framing his State of the Union message:
It would have been more interesting—and shown real self-awareness—if the president had acknowledged his political talents are in some respects wanting when compared not with the universally acknowledged great presidents but with the successful presidents of his own lifetime. We’re thinking here of Reagan and Clinton, who like Obama held office during fractious (if not quite as fractious) periods under divided government. In terms of both compromising with the opposition and emerging victorious from confrontations with it, Reagan and Clinton each enjoyed considerably more success than Obama.
There’s a glaring disconnect in Obama’s characterization of partisan “rancor and suspicion†as being among his “few regrets.†What he’s saying is that he does not regret his actions, only their inevitable consequences. In his 2008 campaign he aspired to unify the country, but he also aspired to “transform†it, “fundamentally†no less. Transformation turned out to be the priority.
His signature “achievementsâ€â€”we’re thinking here of ObamaCare and the Iran deal—were won by bullying doubters in his own party, shutting the other party out entirely, and, crucially, ignoring overwhelming public opposition. He’d have accomplished a lot more had the country been on his side, but had the country been on his side, there would be no need for fundamental transformation. He seldom evinces any doubt that he is right and his detractors—even if they include the large majority of the American people—are wrong.
while in her Washington Post column Ruth Marcus wonders where in the heck campaign finance reform, which featured so prominently in the State of the Union message, has been during the seven years of President Obama’s tenure in office:
Where has this guy been for the past seven years, especially on the issue of campaign finance reform? “It’s great for him to talk about it, but he’s done nothing for the last seven years,†said Democracy 21 President Fred Wert-heimer. “It’s a fundamental failure of his presidency.†Still, he credits the administration for helping to stop some legislative changes that would have made matters even worse.
In 2008, Obama put the nail in the coffin of the public financing system for presidential campaigns, becoming the first presidential candidate since Watergate to run a campaign fueled entirely by private money. Obama vowed then that he was “firmly committed to reforming the system as president.†Uh-huh.
following that with a list of the roadblocks the Obama Administration has placed in the way of campaign finance reform.
The ingrates. The president has been to the mountain; he won’t lead us to the Promised Land. That’s being left to other, lesser figures.
In 2008, Obama put the nail in the coffin of the public financing system for presidential campaigns, becoming the first presidential candidate since Watergate to run a campaign fueled entirely by private money.
Did anyone seriously expect someone who has benefited from the current system to the greatest extent possible to reform that same system?
My experience in life has been that people tend to stick with what’s been working for them. Pretty obviously, the present system has been working for the president.