Rio's victory over Chicago shows us something about the current administration. The 20 hour failed Obama mission to bring the Olympics to Chicago serves as a touchstone for his entire presidency: too little, too late. In other areas more important than sports, we have seen the president flitting from one crisis or situation to another: never really spending enough time or effort to solve one problem before it's off to a new one. We saw it in the Tarp bailouts where the banks were given trillions of dollars WITHOUT having to reform their practices. We saw it the administration's economic stimulus which leading economists like Krugman and Stiglitz said was too small to address the problem. We saw it in the health care reform arena when the administration abandoned its strongest position (single payer), floated an ineffective alternative (the public option) and then backed away even from that tepid program.
Although this diary is critical of the administration, I write it in the hope that the Obama administration can return to its roots and start delivering on the change that it promised the American people a year ago. My criticism of the administration is that it has not been bold enough, it has not adopted progressive alternatives and policies, and it has repeatedly and futilely sought bipartisanship from a decrepit party that never planned to work with it anyway.
We have now had nine months to witness the Obama presidency and from a progressive viewpoint, it has been a nightmare from the get go. Two of Obama's earliest decisions were disasters: the choice of Tim Geithner to be Treasury Secretary and the choice of Rahm Emanuel to be Chief of Staff. Both men were promoted despite their failures. Geithner had been selected by W. to head the New York Fed and from that lofty position, he not only failed to see the oncoming economic disaster he helped to facilitate it. Rahm, with limited experience (about 9 years as a Congressman) in DC was hailed as a political genius DESPITE his opposition to Howard Dean's successful 50 state plan for the Democratic Party. Moreover, he is a consummate DLCer single-handedly responsible for recruiting many DINOS (Democrats in name only) as Blue Dog Democrats. He is actively anti-progressive including profanity laced tirades directed at progressives and their agenda.
To understand the "helter-skelter" presidency, we need to go back to the Tarp bailouts and to the economic stimulus package (remember, they are two different items). The Obama administration basically went along with W's Paulson on the Tarp bailouts (Geithner was a protege of Paulson) and gave trillions of dollars to big banks WITHOUT DEMANDING REFORMS AND CHANGED PRACTICES FROM THEM AT THE SAME TIME. In other words, here's the money, keep doing things as usual. That's not smart, that's not playing 11th dimensional chess!
Obama then flitted on to the next problem, the economic recovery act. Before I discuss that, it should be acknowledged that George W. Bush had laid waste to most of the American society and economy during his disastrous presidency and he certainly put a lot on Obama's plate. That must be recognized. However, rather than tackling one problem at a time and dealing with it decisively, Obama's tendency has been to wage campaigns of words and throw words and public relations at problems. Take the economic recovery act. Despite the economy being the worst since the Great Depression, and over objections of Nobel Prize winning economists, the Obama economic recovery plan was too little and too late. Aside from modest infrastructure plans and aid to states, there was little in the economic stimulus to create jobs. Hence today we see the country's unemployment rate standing at 9.8% and the unofficial-underemployment rate at nearly 20%. For every job available, there are 6 applicants. Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich explains:
"... ten percent unemployment really means twenty percent underemployment or anxious employment. All of which translates directly into late payments on mortgages, credit cards, auto and student loans, and loss of health insurance. It also means sleeplessness for tens of millions of Americans. And, of course, fewer purchases (more on this in a moment). Unemployment of this magnitude and duration also translates into ugly politics, because fear and anxiety are fertile grounds for demagogues weilding the politics of resentment against immigrants, blacks, the poor, government leaders, business leaders, Jews, and other easy targets."
SOURCE: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
Here's more on the unemployment crisis from today's New York Times:
"...a sobering report on the national job market released on Friday amplified worries that a lengthy period of lean times lay ahead. The economy shed 263,000 jobs in September, and the unemployment rate edged up to 9.8 percent from 9.7 percent in August, according to the Labor Department’s monthly snapshot of the employment picture. ...
For those out of work, the job market looks harsher now than at any point in the recession. The number of people who have been jobless for more than six months increased in September by 450,000, reaching 5.4 million.
"We have a truly massive crisis of long-term unemployment," said Christine L. Owens, executive director of the National Employment Law Project in a statement, adding that nearly 400,000 jobless people had exhausted their unemployment benefits by the end of September. "Today’s employment report is a marching order for Congress to pass unemployment benefit extensions to all states, quickly."
SOURCE:
http://www.nytimes.com/...
Why is the unemployment rate so high? Because the economic stimulus was insufficient, because the Obama administration was not bold enough. Again, here's Reich:
Let me say this as clearly and forcefully as I can: The federal government should be spending even more than it already is on roads and bridges and schools and parks and everything else we need. It should make up for cutbacks at the state level, and then some. This is the only way to put Americans back to work. We did it during the Depression. It was called the WPA.
To those who are about ready to attack me as a Republican, Robert Reich served as Clinton's Labor Secretary and is a lifelong Democrat. He has long been critical of the Obama administration's almost complacent attitude on job creation and unemployment. And for that matter, where in hell has Hilda Solis the current Labor Secretary been? It's almost as if she's fallen into a black hole. When she was appointed, many thought she would be another Francis Perkins (female Labor secretary to FDR who was one of the most outspoken people on the left in his administration). Instead, it's almost as if Solis is MIA. The country needs job creation programs pronto.
But we don't seem to get effective solutions in this helter-skelter presidency, we get the image of change without any reality. The best example in this area is health care reform. Hell, for months, Obama has not even talked about that, he's been talking about health INSURANCE reform. So I laugh when I see posts and diaries here that say that a handful of senators is the problem; people like Baucus and Conrad and Lieberman and Bayh. It's true that they are PART of the problem but the person who gave up on real healthcare reform months if not years ago is sitting in the White House. Obama himself called a White House conference on health care reform back in February and failed to invite even a single advocate of single payer. He and his spear carrier in the Senate, Max Baucus, took single payer off the table months ago. Instead, they proposed a compromise: the public option. But the Obama administration has steadfastly backed away from even that tepid position. Obama himself called the public option just a "sliver" in his Colorado speech. His proposal to Congress was really for mandated insurance which Cong. Kucinich correctly called "the wrong approach." And in the midst of the healthcare debate in the Senate, Obama was planning to flit off helter-skelter like to his next project: selling the Chicago Olympics.
Sorry, Mr. President, your helter-skelter approach isn't working. Here's what you should be doing:
- address the fundamental problems underlying the banking industry and Wall St. We need more and tougher regulation of both areas.
- address the unemployment crisis. The country needs massive public works projects, states need more money to deal with their problems and to stop cutting state jobs. Why not institute a modern version of the CCC? Why not double or triple the amount set aside for rail transportation? Why not start an inner city program where IT/computer savvy people teach the young and unemployed IT skills? Why not open a new federal bank that loans money to small businesses since the banks are not loaning money despite the trillions given to them by Paulson and Geithner.
- address the health care problem. The band aid programs being discussed in the Senate won't do it. Take a bolder approach. Take the simplest and cheapest approach available: extend Medicare to everyone.
- cut the fat from the military budget. In your address to Congress, you wrongly said that healthcare was the most expensive undertaking of the federal government. Wrong, wrong, wrong. The health care plan you want costs less than $900 billion FOR 10 years. The military budget (with supplementals) is about the same amount FOR ONE YEAR. The war in Iraq has cost more than $2 trillion and will soon eclipse the Vietnam War cost. Cut costly and unnecessary military bases in Germany, Japan and the UK (which exist 65 years after WWII ended). Get out of Afghanistan altogether: the general you selected in Afghanistan (McChrystal) now wants more troops and more money. For what? The British and USSR empires failed in Afghanistan, so will we.
- reform the tax code. Make it simpler and more progressive. Lots of businesses pay NO taxes because they have so many write-offs. Institute a minimum 10% corporate tax. Reverse the Reagan-Bush tax cuts and make the wealthy pay their fair share.
- shake up your administration and get rid of the Blue Dogs and the Republicans. Fire Rahm, replace Gates at Defense with a Democrat.
The country faces too many severe problems to be served by a helter-skelter presidency. We need President Obama to act and sound more like Candidate Obama.
NOTE:
Helter-skelter according to Merriam-Webster dates back to 1593 and means:
- in undue haste, confusion, or disorder;
- in a haphazard manner
http://www.merriam-webster.com/...
Some sadly misinformed posters here have written that this word can mean but one thing: reference to Charles Manson and a futuristic racial war. Nonsense, as pointed above the word is much older than a book by that title on Manson and has been used as defined above for centuries.
Indeed, another authority, E. Cobham Brewer, Dictionary of Phrase & Fable(1894): defines it as "higgledy-piggledy; in hurry and confusion" and dates it back even farther relating the expression to the Latin "hilariter-celeriter". Source: http://www.infoplease.com/...
Moreover, "helter skelter" has widespread usage before and after the Manson incident as used above. Shakespeare used it in 2 Henry IV:
Sir John, I am thy Pistol and thy friend,
And helter-skelter have I rode to thee,
And tidings do I bring.
Jonathan Swift used it as a title of a poem penned in 1731.
It was the title of a British comedy movie (1949) directed by Ralph Thomas and centering on life within the BBC.
It was the title (English translation of "Horem Padem") of a film by the Czech Director Jan Hrebejk (2004) dealing with post-communist Czech themes.
More recently, it is the title of a play (2008) written by Neil LaBute concerning the life of an average couple in America.
It is also, of course, the title of an album (1996) by D.O.C and a Beatles song whose lyrics follow the same kind of usage I have. Here are some of the Beatle lyrics:
Tell me tell me come on tell me the answer
and you may be a lover but you ain't no dancer
Go helter skelter
helter skelter
helter skelter
Furthermore, "helter-skelter" is: a youth hostel in Berlin; name of a font; a pub and restaurant in Frodsham, Cheshire; a restaurant in London; a restaurant in Hinckley, Leicestershire, U.K; a club on Myspace; a publishing house; a wedding band in Carlow, Ireland; a hiring firm in Middlesbrough, U.K.; a radio show in Munich, Germany; name of a self-contained fountain; a t-shirt from Zazzle.com; name of a techno-balls toy; a marketing promotions company; a rock bank in Yorkshire, U.K.; the name of an amusement park slide; name of a tumbler (with straw included); a clothing line; name of a two person tent; a brand of sunglasses; a brand of drinks chiller; a brand of ski poles; the title of a photo by John Krempl; a speciality wedding cake in Scotland; and my personal favorite, a kind of nanotechnology. None of these usages of "helter-skelter" has anything to do with Charles Manson and are instead associated with the traditional usage of the term used here.
For more on helter-skelter, see http://en.wikipedia.org/...
UPDATE #1: Ravitch and Sabato on Obama Presidency:
Diane Ravitch, Historian of education, NYU and Brookings:
As I wrote the other day on this site, President Obama would look mighty foolish if he went to Copenhagen, made a pitch, and lost. By doing this, he has diminished his stature and acted like a mayor, not the president of the United States. I am reminded of the incident earlier this year when he injected himself into the dispute between Henry Louis Gates and the Cambridge police department. Someone on President Obama's staff needs to explain to him what is appropriate and inappropriate. It is times like this when his inexperience is painfully, embarassingly obvious
Larry J. Sabato, Professor of Politics, University of Virginia:
Let me get this straight. The White House puts a new President’s prestige on the line, flies POTUS, the First Lady, and half of the administration to Europe to underline the importance of the gambit—and then Chicago finishes fourth—dead last—in the Olympics voting? Will anyone’s head roll for causing Obama this acute embarrassment on the international stage?
Political capital is a precious commodity. It is never to be wasted. That’s why many have been questioning whether Obama is making too many media appearances, lessening the importance of each one. And that’s why almost every observer will wonder how the White House got snookered into Olympics-gate—an unnecessary humiliation that will be on the permanent list of losses for this Presidency.
SOURCE: http://www.politico.com/...
UPDATE #2: Gore Vidal Assesses the Obama Presidency.
From a 30 September story in the Times (London) on line:
Last year he famously switched allegiance from Hillary Clinton to Barack Obama during the Democratic nomination process for president. Now, he reveals, he regrets his change of heart. How’s Obama doing? "Dreadfully. I was hopeful. He was the most intelligent person we’ve had in that position for a long time. But he’s inexperienced. He has a total inability to understand military matters. He’s acting as if Afghanistan is the magic talisman: solve that and you solve terrorism." ...
Another notable Obama mis-step has been on healthcare reform. "He f***ed it up. I don’t know how because the country wanted it. We’ll never see it happen." As for his wider vision: "Maybe he doesn’t have one, not to imply he is a fraud. He loves quoting Lincoln and there’s a great Lincoln quote from a letter he wrote to one of his generals in the South after the Civil War. ‘I am President of the United States. I have full overall power and never forget it, because I will exercise it’. That’s what Obama needs — a bit of Lincoln’s chill." ...
Vidal now believes, as he did originally, Clinton would be the better president. "Hillary knows more about the world and what to do with the generals. History has proven when the girls get involved, they’re good at it.
SOURCE: (emphasis added)http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/the_way_we_live/article6854221.ece#