This is from Daniel Pipes, National Review Online columnist:
I do not customarily offer advice to a president whose election I opposed, whose goals I fear, and whose policies I work against. But here is an idea for Barack Obama to salvage his tottering administration by taking a step that protects the United States and its allies...
...This poor performance has caused an unprecedented collapse in the polls and the loss of three major by-elections, culminating two weeks ago in an astonishing senatorial defeat in Massachusetts. Obama’s attempts to "reset" his presidency will likely fail if he focuses on economics, where he is just one of many players.
He needs a dramatic gesture to change the public perception of him as a light-weight, bumbling ideologue, preferably in an arena where the stakes are high, where he can take charge, and where he can trump expectations.
...He failed to deliver on employment and health care, he failed in foreign-policy forays small (e.g., landing the 2016 Olympics) and large (relations with China and Japan).
Such an opportunity does exist: Obama can give orders for the U.S. military to destroy Iran’s nuclear-weapon capacity.
This is how Pipes begins his column. And while I'm sure the president appreciates his advice, and the backhanded manner in which it was given, I don't believe Pipes' wet dream of going to war with Iran will happen--at least not for the lame-ass reasoning Mr. Pipes gives. But let's not just use extemporaneous thinking here. Let's tackle some of Mr. Pipes' assertions head on with a few facts.
Let's talk about foreign relations with the Chinese. President Obama, eager to provide a new form of global leadership-- that relies more on partnership than bluntness-- met serious resistance from a new Chinese government. One that is a newly recognized economic power, making its own demands. It is the Chinese, buoyed by their status in the global economy-- who want to know why America's economy is in tatters-- and why we can't seem to clean up our government finances. President Obama's lone position of strength was the office he holds, and even that has been diminished by the putrid display of presidential authority by President George W. Bush.
While no concessions were won by this administration, I would hardly call his first foray into the foreign policy spotlight a failure-- especially so early in his presidency. To this point Mr. Pipes, I consider you just another conservative ideologue, beating the drum for the failed policies of old. Which leads me into point two.
Pipes must surely recognize the term ideologue because that's what he and his party currently are. For the past year, conservatives' best (and only) strategy on policy issues important to Americans was to saying no. It was not in their best interests politically, to vote for any piece of legislation coming through the Washington pipeline. That's pretty sound political strategy, but it's not leadership. In fact, it's a dereliction of duty. It's a deliberate slap in the face of American voters, who voted to send them to Washington to bring about a change in Washington politics. And why? Simply because they could.
If voters empower their elected officials to enact policies they deem appropriate, what are we to do? This is the nature of democracy. One party wins, one party does not. To hold up legislation just to spite the opposition is petty. It's the true definition of an ideologue, and you and your conservative brethren Mr. Pipes have come to define the term. Not the president.
Point three is health care, and while I could write a novel discussing the nuances of the health care reform debate, I won't. I'll just simply refer you to the previous paragraph, and add one additional caveat: Demagoguery and obstruction created a hostile, poisonous atmosphere this past year. It held us all captive not just over the substance of the bills debated, but the process of the debate. And while I am on record as saying the president's handling of the legislative process was wrong here, and here-- the fundamental principle does not change: GOP obstinance was real because they had no intention of reforming our health care system. They never have, and they never will.
To illustrate my point: Congressman Mike Pence, (R-IN) asked the president at the house GOP retreat last Friday whether or not he would support a GOP initiative to include consumers buying insurance across state lines. The president, almost incredulously, told the congressman that that piece of language was already in the senate bill. Why is this important? Because it plainly shows that no member of the house republican leadership bothered to do their research, and read the damn bill! Ignorance and obstinance is appalling. They have indeed put party before country.
So you see Mr. Pipes, I don't believe the administration is tottering. I don't feel they need to start a disingenuous war just to shore up lagging poll numbers. We've already been down that road. I know it's one you are intimately familiar with, but the people are done with the "bombs for polling" approach. If you had any common sense yourself, you would be too.