Badin vs. Fredericktown
Miamisburg graduation 2012
Valley View vs. Greenville
Ellen Belcher is the Dayton Daily News opinion pages editor. She writes about state government, education, the environment, higher education and all things Dayton.
Martin Gottlieb is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He focuses on the political process itself and does such national issues as war, the economy, taxes and Social Security, as well as a hodge-podge of local and state issues.Home > Blogs > A Matter of Opinion > Archives > 2010 > June > 22 > Entry
Martin Gottlieb: Obama looking baffled by backlash against him
2010 ELECTION
Perfunctory. President Barack Obama’s visit to Ohio last Friday, June 18, was by the numbers — in more ways than one.
He wanted mainly to highlight some numbers. The occasion itself was a celebration of what he says is the 10,000th road project funded by his stimulus. And he had numbers about jobs and dollars.
Indeed, in his 13-minute speech there wasn’t much more, except a defense of “investment,” sometimes known as spending.
He said the stimulus wasn’t just about spurring the economy now, but about the long term, too. He cited trains, modern Internet delivery, infrastructure and electronic medical records as realms getting needed investments.
He offered no new argument and no new turn of words, unless you count the White House’s reference to “Recovery Summer,” the name given to a planned six-week campaign around the country that started in Columbus.
Perhaps it’s understandable that he didn’t have an imagination-capturing campaign pitch in this campaign speech. It’s still early. And he has been necessarily focused on certain other matters.
At some stage, though, he needs to come up with something better than statistics. The other side has plenty of statistics, too — about the economy, spending and the deficit.
He has been much criticized for failing to communicate well with the public, for failing to sell his health insurance plan and his presidency generally. Such criticism flows automatically from his sinking poll numbers and the general view that the Democrats are in trouble in November. He’s being called too cerebral, detached, cold — by his friends.
Ultimately, though, the problem isn’t that he’s a bad communicator (where did that come from?), or that he isn’t paying enough attention to his role as operator of the great pulpit, or that he isn’t following the best political advice.
The problem seems to be that he simply doesn’t have a response to the backlash he has fostered.
He gives the impression of not even recognizing it. He keeps talking about his foes as the banks or Wall Street or the insurance companies. Nonsense. They’re not the problem. The problem, obviously, is a populist backlash against big government. Ignoring a problem is a dubious way of dealing with it. So one might reasonably guess that the reason he doesn’t address the problem is that he doesn’t know what to say.
Like most liberal politicians, he is uncomfortable discussing ideology publicly: what’s the proper role of government and all that? The closest he comes is calling himself a “pragmatist.”
Surely he’s on record someplace as saying that the important issue isn’t the size of the government but its effectiveness, that government has both successes and failures and that the trick is to eliminate the failures.
They all talk like that when pressed on philosophy. But they prefer to stick with talk about specific policies they favor.
But the situation now is that Obama’s record — built around big government more than he may have intended before the collapse of the economy — has handed his opponents a neat little message: We want less government!
What’s his equivalent mantra? Surely not a call for more government. Almost nobody really has that goal, no matter how often people get accused of having it. And absolutely nobody believes it is salable.
His problem is certainly not that he’s too dignified or cerebral to have patience for neat little messages. Remember change?
Can that one be revived? Maybe, as a fallback. In 1982, when the economy was in sharp recession and Democrats were calling for change, President Ronald Reagan — just elected in 1980 — said, “We are the change.” Republican losses in the election were substantial, but not huge.
As of now, the Democrats are losing by default the philosophical debate about the government’s future. That portends bigger problems than a bad mid-term.
Even before he focuses on developing a campaign mantra, Obama should give a speech about the role of government. Does he really want to expand it as much as possible? What evidence can he offer for his denial of that charge? How does he see the role?
A charge unrebutted — you are out to increase government — is an awful lot like a charge copped to.
If he’s afraid of a philosophical discussion — this man who’s accused of being too cerebral — something’s wrong.
Permalink | Comments (27) | Post your comment | Categories: Columns, Elections, Martin Gottlieb, National Politics, Ohio politics
Comments
By Stephen
June 22, 2010 10:22 PM | Link to this
i disagree with alot of this column. Yes I do think we need government to collect taxes to pay for the services that we need. I also think we need government to protect the public interest from corporations and business that are only focused on making money and the bottom line. So do we want a HUGE, inefficient government? No…do we want the proper size with regulations to protect consumers and a proper amount of taxes collected to pay for good services? yes. Government has its place. The Tea party yelling for less govenment in a time when corporations and derivitive traders have spiraled the public into a mess and lost their fortunes is really nonsensical. Government spending always offsets a period of recession, as advocated by Keynesian economics. This is an easy debate to win.
By bobby
June 23, 2010 12:20 AM | Link to this
Perhaps our President recognizes that we are experiencing an economic anomoly. He may be concerned that the economy may not be able to grow its way out of the massive debt and future liabilities. He might recognize the possibility that tradition Keyensian government stimulus might not ALWAYS offset a recession. P.S. If your bread has been buttered by the government,you are about to experience some of the pain the private sector has endured.
By Kurt
June 23, 2010 6:37 AM | Link to this
Not a bad piece of writing, for once. The thing is, Obama is not smart by any means.—Navy corpsman—57 states—and so on. Obama is simply an ivory towered American hating Muslim influenced, Marxist theorist, who despises the private sector, and thinks Gov, is God, like all liberal democrats. He simply doesn’t have a clue, and is in way over his head, May God help this country.
By Raoul
June 23, 2010 7:32 AM | Link to this
What a surprise to read Martin’s comments. It sounds like Martin has been tuning in to Rush Limbaugh. As for Keynesian economics to end a recession, well, count me in as one who has seen that old canard proven to be a fundamentally flawed strategy. We are not at the mercy of big corporations and greedy Wall Streeters. We have enough regulation to protect us, but we have to enforce them. Democrats like to say their leaders are ‘cerebral’, as if to let them off the hook for being such poor leaders. We need leadership, common sense, and decisiveness. Obama can still rise to the occasion, but I’m betting he won’t. He is, after all, a community organizer with a built-in dynamic to change an America that he doesn’t really like.
By joe_mamma
June 23, 2010 8:07 AM | Link to this
Nice analysis Martin. My only nitpick would be that I don’t think you are getting that “conservatives”/libertarians view government largesse and government effectiveness as two sides of the same coin. They both lead to government interference into private life. They both take power and initiative from the individual and replace it with government. You touched on it in your piece when you talked about the proper role of government. I don’t want a slimmed down but intrusive government making healthcare decisions for me anymore than a large ineffective bureaucratic government doing it.
By TRS
June 23, 2010 11:12 AM | Link to this
To no surprise, I agree with Raoul regarding leadership. Much was made about how cerebral the President is and I assume him to be an intelligent man. He is also an excellent public speaker; but, has been unable to inspire as he did during the campaign - why? Prez Obama is a likeable person, appears to be a good family man and has many admirable qualities; but, has little experience at leadership. His life reflects someone who has advanced by the likeable traits of his personality and his intellect and perhaps that is why he is so surprised because on the big stage of the Presidency, they may be necessary traits but simply won’t carry the day - leadership requires far more than that. His style seems to be to poke at an issue, then delegate it and take a hands off approach. In doing that he negates his personal traits and they are replaced with such folks as Pelosi and Reid. One only need look at their approval rating to see how people feel about them. Add to that the policies he is pursuing. When we look at the world today, ie Greece, Spain, etc and see the parallels which reflect him wanting to take the country in that direction, common sense and the huge deficit tells most that is not a good idea. I don’t suggest the President should be a detail guy - we had that in Jimmy Carter; but, I do believe he lacks the great leadership qualities - something sorely needed in the times we are in. I disagree with FDR but he obviously was a leader - so was Reagan. I don’t see Prez Obama rising to their levels.
By Max
June 23, 2010 5:43 PM | Link to this
“As of now, the Democrats are losing by default the philosophical debate about the government’s future. That portends bigger problems than a bad mid-term.” ————This is true. What is potentially dangerous and disturbing is the GOP is trying to decide which TV/Radio personality to follow. As an Independent I think those Dem’s and GOP candidates who can resist party extremes and meet in the middle will benefit in November. Obama has lost all the new car smell and is essentialy floundering under bad advice since April. That he is suprised by the response also shows he has been essentially insulated by his advisers. In FDR’s day Obama might have gotten away with the drilling moratorium without an injunction out of respect for his office. Those romantic days are long gone. It’s the Afghanistan ‘non-policy’ that have Democrats bailing the leaking ship they are on. Obama must be longing for the good old days of healthcare debates….
By Stephen
June 23, 2010 11:34 PM | Link to this
to RAoul and others in here saying we have enough regulations and we arent at the mercy of Corporations and Wall Street. You have not been awake the last 2 years. An unregulated derivatives market based on risky trading is what led to this meltdown, and we need more regulation. Im not sure what reality you are living in, but it is not real. And Keneysian economics are proven wrong? hmm…are you an academic or an ecomomist? I didnt think so, I think you are a Tea partier or some partisan who will say anything to try to appear correct, including denying the truth. Economoists agree that Govt spending is needed in recession to offset lack of consumer spending. That is pretty much an accepted fact in economics. Looks like you might need ot hit the books, rather than claim things that arent true. If you make a claim, back it up please. Thank you
By irishguy
June 24, 2010 8:39 AM | Link to this
Must have been tough for Martin to type “Obama looking baffled…”. But I think as the next 2 years unfold, he’ll get used to it.
By Marty's a Tool
June 24, 2010 9:35 AM | Link to this
Maybe Marty is finally figuring out that all the pre-election love fest for Obama was a fantasy. Behind all the rhetoric, is the now setting in reality that there was no real basis for it. The real Obama is the man you see now. Marty, face it. Liberal idealism meets reality. When you get past the eloquent speeches, there is nothing there.
By Neonmoon
June 24, 2010 11:25 AM | Link to this
Yeh, Stephen, we all know that more regulation is needed…more laws will take care of everything. Just like the law against speeding works so well or maybe the law against running red lights. How sophomoric are you? Just remember “hope”, “change” and you will FEEL better.
By bobby
June 24, 2010 2:24 PM | Link to this
Stephen, For your edificatiion: Anomoly Definition: Discrepancy or deviation from an established rule or trend….. If you have a job in the public sector you have been insulated from revenue shortfalls by Obama’s stimulus. Our pragmatic President realizes the hope and change message will convert to austerity and higher taxes before the next presidential election if the economy doesn’t turn, fast.
By Raoul
June 25, 2010 1:08 PM | Link to this
Stephen - You must be referring to Paul Krugman, the pathetic partisan blowhard from the NYT. For the record, we have regulation over-sight for deep water drilling also. The problem comes when the regulators fail to regulate, which happened on Wall Street and the Gulf of Mexico. I am neither an academic nor an economist…thank God! The academics of the world are killing us, and the economists are more confused enlightened. They still haven’t learned that when you cut taxes, revenue to the government increases. Why didn’t the economists predict the financial collapse? Oh, that’s right, some of them did. But it wasn’t the ones advocating for more government spending. As for backing up claims, how about the Reagan era way of ending a recession? Was that an example of Keynesian economic policy? To be sure, the government spent a lot of money, but consumers did also. A rising tide lifts all boats. So, why don’t you provide some facts for your claims? And, if you are an academic, try learning some grammar and spelling. I can help you there if you’re interested.
By Jim
June 25, 2010 11:06 PM | Link to this
Nice piece Martin. President Obama has accomplished a lot in less than two years in office. He’s getting the job done, and is taking on tough problems. Stimulus Bill w/Tax Cuts, New SALT Treaty, Health Care Reform, SChip expansion, Financial Reform, Ledbetter Act, Tobacco regulation, Ending the war in Iraq, Cut the F22, etc….However, he hasn’t communicated these accomplishments to public very well. Since most people don’t read papers anymore, the White needs to be more creative in getting their message out and let people know how much they’re getting done. And he’s being hammered daily by Faux News and talk radio, which is never going to publicize, in a positive light, any of his very real accomplishments
By Katherine
June 26, 2010 11:02 PM | Link to this
“Stimulus Bill w/Tax By Jim Cuts, New SALT Treaty, Health Care Reform, SChip expansion, Financial Reform, Ledbetter Act, Tobacco regulation, Ending the war in Iraq, Cut the F22” > Surely you are joking, the 68% of the people want the health care repelled by and are furious at the stimulus bill. Ending the Iraq war ??? Oh brother!
By Katherine
June 26, 2010 11:02 PM | Link to this
“Stimulus Bill w/Tax By Jim Cuts, New SALT Treaty, Health Care Reform, SChip expansion, Financial Reform, Ledbetter Act, Tobacco regulation, Ending the war in Iraq, Cut the F22” > Surely you are joking, the 68% of the people want the health care repelled by and are furious at the stimulus bill. Ending the Iraq war ??? Oh brother!
By Philman
June 27, 2010 5:45 AM | Link to this
Keynsian Economics is being tossed around like that is in Obama’s play book, I’m afraid it’s more Sinister than that, He is using the Cloward Piven strategy, and the media is onboard, or else they would be warning America,I just keep reminding myself the Bible tells us this will happen,Ezekiel & Revelations, and GOD is in Ultimate Control of everything.
By Jonnie
June 28, 2010 6:27 AM | Link to this
Martin is starting to see the light!! What a pleasantry. Time to come around and understand what we are trying to say.
By Hank Lutes
June 28, 2010 12:35 PM | Link to this
The President isn’t popular because people don’t trust him. They know he was attached to Acorn. The Czars he has are not of good reputation and he wants to make bigger govt., tax us to death and control too much. He supports Islamists and I don’t.
By Hank Lutes
June 28, 2010 12:36 PM | Link to this
The President isn’t popular because people don’t trust him. They know he was attached to Acorn. The Czars he has are not of good reputation and he wants to make bigger govt., tax us to death and control too much. He supports Islamists and I don’t.
By Hank Lutes
June 28, 2010 12:37 PM | Link to this
The President isn’t popular because people don’t trust him. They know he was attached to Acorn. The Czars he has are not of good reputation and he wants to make bigger govt., tax us to death and control too much. He supports Islamists and I don’t.
By Ernie Ora
June 28, 2010 1:07 PM | Link to this
Backlash? He has to know there are many people out here that see what he is doing! He slighted Rev. Franklin Graham because he told the truth about Islamists being evil. He has Cass Sunstein working against our gun rights. He pushed that healthcare witchery through that needs to be repealed. And the public is supposed to think he is something? Oh, he is something, alright! I guess we need to pray for him. I am not pleased with him though.
By Eric Richard Lynch
June 29, 2010 2:38 PM | Link to this
President Obama has associated with such off colored characters and made such restrictive plans in his proposed legislation, it would be hard to think well of him. He seeks to have the FCC control what is said in our media, he has the govt. control more than 50 percent stock of General Motors with no plans to release the company back to private status, his healthcare plan puts the govt. in charge of a majority of healthcare while taxing us more and giving us less say in our future, he supports the rights of Islamists more than he does that of Christians. I hope to see him out of office in 2012 and hope he doesn’t take our rights away to send email without having everything monitored.
By Eric Richard Lynch
June 29, 2010 2:40 PM | Link to this
President Obama has associated with such off colored characters and made such restrictive plans in his proposed legislation, it would be hard to think well of him. He seeks to have the FCC control what is said in our media, he has the govt. control more than 50 percent stock of General Motors with no plans to release the company back to private status, his healthcare plan puts the govt. in charge of a majority of healthcare while taxing us more and giving us less say in our future, he supports the rights of Islamists more than he does that of Christians. I hope to see him out of office in 2012 and hope he doesn’t take our rights away to send email without having everything monitored.
By Eric Richard Lynch
June 29, 2010 2:40 PM | Link to this
President Obama has associated with such off colored characters and made such restrictive plans in his proposed legislation, it would be hard to think well of him. He seeks to have the FCC control what is said in our media, he has the govt. control more than 50 percent stock of General Motors with no plans to release the company back to private status, his healthcare plan puts the govt. in charge of a majority of healthcare while taxing us more and giving us less say in our future, he supports the rights of Islamists more than he does that of Christians. I hope to see him out of office in 2012 and hope he doesn’t take our rights away to send email without having everything monitored.
By Ice Bandit
June 29, 2010 5:23 PM | Link to this
It’s good to see statist Marty acknowledge government failures. But about those government successes, where the heck are they? A state’s main concern should be protection of citizenry, but that ain’t even on the state’s to-do list. Our revolving door courtrooms, our cops who have become ersatz tax collectors and our other agencies who let underwear bombers on planes couldn’t be on that success list. Just where are those government jobs done well, Marty? We’re waiting….
By Horace
July 1, 2010 12:49 AM | Link to this
He’s not popular because he’s a liar. He campaigned saying one thing and has done the complete other. He promised transparency, given everything but that. He’s surrounded with liars, cheats and idiots and he declared a war on the oil in the gulf then refused to fight it. Arizona is begging for help and he threatens a law suit. That’s why people are finally smartening up and I’m happy to see it. As George Bush says, “Miss me yet?”