SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Obama's Test: Will He Be a Manager or a Leader?
Jan 27, 2010
A new president gets a full year to prepare his initial State of the Union address.
That is a blessing and a curse.
An immediate address, given a week or two after the inaugural, would
offer an opportunity to subtly blame everything on an inept, evil or
crooked predecessor.
An address delivered after a full year in office does not afford such an opportunity.
There is no alternative for the sitting president but to describe the state of the union under his watch.
This will be Barack Obama's circumstance tonight, as he delivers the
first of what he and his aides hope will be seven State of the Union
addresses.
Obama will, of course, find much to celebrate. Presidents always do,
as they play the political game of linking their service with all that
is good, decent and appealing in the land -- think Ronald Reagan's
"morning in America..."
But when all is said and done, Obama will have to face the fact that
the American people, by now overwhelming majorities according to the
polls -- think the country is headed in the wrong direction.
Facing a fierce opposition, fearful allies and a frustrated
electorate that has not seen enough "change" and is running out of
"hope," Obama must offer a great deal more than rhetoric tonight.
The president blew the run-up to the speech by veering left, with
populist bashing of banks, and then right, with talk of a domestic
spending freeze, in a manner that made him seem reactionary rather than
realistic. After the loss of the Massachusetts Senate seat of his
liberal mentor, Edward Kennedy, and with it the 60-seat majority that
gave his party a measure of congressional dominance, Obama seemed
desperate and uncertain.
That's dangerous politically.
More than any specific policy (a little less health care) or theme
(a little more fiscal responsibility) tonight, Obama must project a
coherent sense of himself. The candidate who so many Americans were
able to imagine as their political ideal is now a president who
conservatives and liberals, Republicans and Democrats, and above all
independents, see as less than that ideal.
Obama cannot and will not satisfy everyone tonight. And he should not try.
Rather, he must define himself and his vision. After a year of
serving as a punching bag for the right and a source of frustration for
the left, he has to talk about what he wants to do now.
An attempt to balance competing interests, an imagining of some
bipartisan possibility that has somehow eluded him, a Clinton-esque
triangulation, will muddy his message.
Tinkering will be seen as tinkering.
If Obama is not bold, clear and more aggressively progressive than
he has ever been -- especially on job creation but, more importantly,
on reaserting a vision of government as an essential force for good --
his speech will be meaningless exercise.
If the president bogs down in blather about deficits and balanced
budgets -- employing the language of managers rather than leaders -- he
will miss a rare opportunity to change the debate.
If he comes on strong, promising to invest in jobs and pay for the
project not with new taxes on working Americans but with accountability
taxes on banks and speculators -- he will of course engage his critics.
But they live in a state of perpetual rage.
The president's job tonight is to excite his base and give wavering independents a clear sense of where he is headed.
The president's job tonight is not to outline the State of the Union in any formal sense.
The State of the Union is not good -- or, at the very least, not good enough.
The president must explain exactly what he is going to do to -- dare we employ the word -- change that state for the better.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
© 2023 The Nation
John Nichols
John Nichols is Washington correspondent for The Nation and associate editor of The Capital Times in Madison, Wisconsin. His books co-authored with Robert W. McChesney are: "Dollarocracy: How the Money and Media Election Complex is Destroying America" (2014), "The Death and Life of American Journalism: The Media Revolution that Will Begin the World Again" (2011), and "Tragedy & Farce: How the American Media Sell Wars, Spin Elections, and Destroy Democracy" (2006). Nichols' other books include: "The "S" Word: A Short History of an American Tradition...Socialism" (2015), "Dick: The Man Who is President (2004) and "The Genius of Impeachment: The Founders' Cure for Royalism" (2006).
A new president gets a full year to prepare his initial State of the Union address.
That is a blessing and a curse.
An immediate address, given a week or two after the inaugural, would
offer an opportunity to subtly blame everything on an inept, evil or
crooked predecessor.
An address delivered after a full year in office does not afford such an opportunity.
There is no alternative for the sitting president but to describe the state of the union under his watch.
This will be Barack Obama's circumstance tonight, as he delivers the
first of what he and his aides hope will be seven State of the Union
addresses.
Obama will, of course, find much to celebrate. Presidents always do,
as they play the political game of linking their service with all that
is good, decent and appealing in the land -- think Ronald Reagan's
"morning in America..."
But when all is said and done, Obama will have to face the fact that
the American people, by now overwhelming majorities according to the
polls -- think the country is headed in the wrong direction.
Facing a fierce opposition, fearful allies and a frustrated
electorate that has not seen enough "change" and is running out of
"hope," Obama must offer a great deal more than rhetoric tonight.
The president blew the run-up to the speech by veering left, with
populist bashing of banks, and then right, with talk of a domestic
spending freeze, in a manner that made him seem reactionary rather than
realistic. After the loss of the Massachusetts Senate seat of his
liberal mentor, Edward Kennedy, and with it the 60-seat majority that
gave his party a measure of congressional dominance, Obama seemed
desperate and uncertain.
That's dangerous politically.
More than any specific policy (a little less health care) or theme
(a little more fiscal responsibility) tonight, Obama must project a
coherent sense of himself. The candidate who so many Americans were
able to imagine as their political ideal is now a president who
conservatives and liberals, Republicans and Democrats, and above all
independents, see as less than that ideal.
Obama cannot and will not satisfy everyone tonight. And he should not try.
Rather, he must define himself and his vision. After a year of
serving as a punching bag for the right and a source of frustration for
the left, he has to talk about what he wants to do now.
An attempt to balance competing interests, an imagining of some
bipartisan possibility that has somehow eluded him, a Clinton-esque
triangulation, will muddy his message.
Tinkering will be seen as tinkering.
If Obama is not bold, clear and more aggressively progressive than
he has ever been -- especially on job creation but, more importantly,
on reaserting a vision of government as an essential force for good --
his speech will be meaningless exercise.
If the president bogs down in blather about deficits and balanced
budgets -- employing the language of managers rather than leaders -- he
will miss a rare opportunity to change the debate.
If he comes on strong, promising to invest in jobs and pay for the
project not with new taxes on working Americans but with accountability
taxes on banks and speculators -- he will of course engage his critics.
But they live in a state of perpetual rage.
The president's job tonight is to excite his base and give wavering independents a clear sense of where he is headed.
The president's job tonight is not to outline the State of the Union in any formal sense.
The State of the Union is not good -- or, at the very least, not good enough.
The president must explain exactly what he is going to do to -- dare we employ the word -- change that state for the better.
John Nichols
John Nichols is Washington correspondent for The Nation and associate editor of The Capital Times in Madison, Wisconsin. His books co-authored with Robert W. McChesney are: "Dollarocracy: How the Money and Media Election Complex is Destroying America" (2014), "The Death and Life of American Journalism: The Media Revolution that Will Begin the World Again" (2011), and "Tragedy & Farce: How the American Media Sell Wars, Spin Elections, and Destroy Democracy" (2006). Nichols' other books include: "The "S" Word: A Short History of an American Tradition...Socialism" (2015), "Dick: The Man Who is President (2004) and "The Genius of Impeachment: The Founders' Cure for Royalism" (2006).
A new president gets a full year to prepare his initial State of the Union address.
That is a blessing and a curse.
An immediate address, given a week or two after the inaugural, would
offer an opportunity to subtly blame everything on an inept, evil or
crooked predecessor.
An address delivered after a full year in office does not afford such an opportunity.
There is no alternative for the sitting president but to describe the state of the union under his watch.
This will be Barack Obama's circumstance tonight, as he delivers the
first of what he and his aides hope will be seven State of the Union
addresses.
Obama will, of course, find much to celebrate. Presidents always do,
as they play the political game of linking their service with all that
is good, decent and appealing in the land -- think Ronald Reagan's
"morning in America..."
But when all is said and done, Obama will have to face the fact that
the American people, by now overwhelming majorities according to the
polls -- think the country is headed in the wrong direction.
Facing a fierce opposition, fearful allies and a frustrated
electorate that has not seen enough "change" and is running out of
"hope," Obama must offer a great deal more than rhetoric tonight.
The president blew the run-up to the speech by veering left, with
populist bashing of banks, and then right, with talk of a domestic
spending freeze, in a manner that made him seem reactionary rather than
realistic. After the loss of the Massachusetts Senate seat of his
liberal mentor, Edward Kennedy, and with it the 60-seat majority that
gave his party a measure of congressional dominance, Obama seemed
desperate and uncertain.
That's dangerous politically.
More than any specific policy (a little less health care) or theme
(a little more fiscal responsibility) tonight, Obama must project a
coherent sense of himself. The candidate who so many Americans were
able to imagine as their political ideal is now a president who
conservatives and liberals, Republicans and Democrats, and above all
independents, see as less than that ideal.
Obama cannot and will not satisfy everyone tonight. And he should not try.
Rather, he must define himself and his vision. After a year of
serving as a punching bag for the right and a source of frustration for
the left, he has to talk about what he wants to do now.
An attempt to balance competing interests, an imagining of some
bipartisan possibility that has somehow eluded him, a Clinton-esque
triangulation, will muddy his message.
Tinkering will be seen as tinkering.
If Obama is not bold, clear and more aggressively progressive than
he has ever been -- especially on job creation but, more importantly,
on reaserting a vision of government as an essential force for good --
his speech will be meaningless exercise.
If the president bogs down in blather about deficits and balanced
budgets -- employing the language of managers rather than leaders -- he
will miss a rare opportunity to change the debate.
If he comes on strong, promising to invest in jobs and pay for the
project not with new taxes on working Americans but with accountability
taxes on banks and speculators -- he will of course engage his critics.
But they live in a state of perpetual rage.
The president's job tonight is to excite his base and give wavering independents a clear sense of where he is headed.
The president's job tonight is not to outline the State of the Union in any formal sense.
The State of the Union is not good -- or, at the very least, not good enough.
The president must explain exactly what he is going to do to -- dare we employ the word -- change that state for the better.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.