Well, it's Rahm again. The WaPo is playing up Rahm's leaks and trashing Axelrod for him. In this article, the WaPo author (not Milbank this time) speaks of Rahm's hotheaded image, and then turns to hagiography: it tells us how Rahm could have saved President Obama from himself, if only the President had listened.
WaPo: Hotheaded Emanuel may be White House voice of reason
But a contrarian narrative is emerging: Emanuel is a force of political reason within the White House and could have helped the administration avoid its current bind if the president had heeded his advice on some of the most sensitive subjects of the year: health-care reform, jobs and trying alleged terrorists in civilian courts.
More after the fold
Here are some core points in the article. It is worth reading in its entirely. It's long (4 internet pages). Check out Wasserman-Schultz's comment praising Rahm and implictly dissing the President. She never will get a donation from me.
It is a view propounded by lawmakers and early supporters of President Obama who are frustrated because they think the administration has gone for the perfect at the expense of the plausible. They believe Emanuel, the town's leading purveyor of four-letter words, a former Israeli army volunteer and a product of a famously argumentative family, was not aggressive enough in trying to persuade a singularly self-assured president and a coterie of true-believer advisers that "change you can believe in" is best pursued through accomplishments you can pass.
snip
And in the search for what has gone wrong, influential Democrats are -- in unusually frank terms -- blaming Obama and his closest campaign aides for not listening to Emanuel.
snip
Axelrod has a strong view of the historic character Obama is supposed to be," said an early Obama supporter who is close to the president and spoke on the condition of anonymity to give a frank assessment of frustration with the White House. The source blamed Obama's charmed political life for creating a self-confidence and trust in principle that led to an "indifference to doing the small, marginal things a White House could do to mitigate the problems on the Hill. Rahm knows the geography better."
snip
One administration official close to Emanuel did not dispute that Obama had overruled Emanuel on some key policy issues.
snip
But the Rahm-knows-better-than-the-president notion, increasingly spread by his allies and articulated in a Washington Post column by Dana Milbank last month, is, regardless of its relation to reality, creating more tension for the chief of staff inside the White House and drawing more scrutiny from outside.
WaPo: Hotheaded Emanuel may be White House voice of reason
Get the picture. Rahm could have saved President Obama if only he had listened. Rahm = good. President Obama gets blamed.
I don't like it, and I have criticized this President on several policy issues. This kind of attack from within the White House is bullshit disloyalty by Rahm. It's CYA by Rahm. I'm with the President on this.
Yes, the attack on President Obama (from Rahm and/or his allies) is that Obama is a "purist" putting the perfect ahead of the good. Now we know this President has compromised on many things, to the point that some of his strongest supporters feel alienated. But for Rahm and his allies, it is not enough. They want more.
I will tell you which side I am on here and it's not Rahm Emanuel's. I'll take President Obama, David Axelrod, David Plouffe and Robert Gibbs. They may not be progressive populists or as far left as I am, but there is overlap on goals. President Obama is doing the right thing in fighting for comprehensive health insurance reform. He has some progressive views. I wish there were a public option in it; I wish for a lot of things. But even with all the compromises, this bill will help people.
I notice that Rahm and his allies have been leaking these stories ever since David Plouffe returned. I also notice that Barack Obama has seemed to fight more and seems more like the candidate in 2008 than he was at times last year since Plouffe got back.
Thank God, President Obama has rejected some of Rahm's advice. I also think these stories, so clearly orchestrated by Rahm and his allies, are harmful to the President and will eventually lead to Rahm's retirement to spend more time with his familiy.
I'll take Obama and Axelrod over Rahm any day.
It's time for Rahm to go.
Update I: Apparently some of the Rahm supporters are arguing that the article is "unsourced" and cannot be believed. I guess they did not take my advice and read the article. I can only quote so much in a diary. This comment lays out many of the sources on the record:
"Unsourced" (12+ / 0-)
Recommended by:itsbenj, slinkerwink, semiot, vacantlook, blue in NC, Timothy J, jds1978, sable, TomP, elwior, cybrestrike, ohmyheck
Unsourced gossip worthy of Politico.
Yeah, the article just quoted directly:
** Debbie Wasserman-Schulz
** Lindsey Graham
** Olympia Snowe
** Luis Gutierrez
** Rosa DeLauro
** Joel Johnson
** Valerie Jarrett
** Chris Van Hollen
** Steny Hoyer
** Kent Conrad
** Robert Casey
How dare a diarist discuss a Washington Post article which only included 11 on-the-record sources?
Granted, the article also included some commentary from sources who wished to remain unidentified, but the article can hardly be dismissed offhand as "unsourced gossip."
by businessdem on Tue Mar 02, 2010 at 07:52:40 AM PST
[ Parent | Reply to This | RecommendHide ]
by businessdem
Strawmen and knee-jerk attacks are the language of some for God knows what reason. I have been at Daily Kos since October 2006 and it is only in the last six months or so that I have seen attacks on unions, Howard Dean, progressives, and now people protecting Rahm when he undermines the President.
If you think Rahm is a good guy, where have you been since the 90s?
We are not the DLC here. I wish people read Kos more. Kos has been fighting people like Rahm at least since 2002 when he started blogging at Daily Kos. I am to the left of Kos, but we share the idea of reclaiming the Democratic Party for the people. Rahm is the past, not the future.
Thank you businessdem for that list.
Update II: The dreaded vote of confidence. Baseball managers usually get this shortly before being fired, but politics is not sports so it may be a good thing for Rahm:
"He absolutely has the president's confidence. There's nobody working harder at passing the president's agenda than the chief of staff."
Gibbs on On Emanuel today