|
Obama Speech Shows
He’s Out of Touch
By Dick Morris
Published on TheHill.com on January 26, 2011
Henry Kissinger, in his memoir of the Ford administration, Years of
Upheaval, articulated the central rule of governing: “It is a
statesman’s duty to bridge the gap between his nation’s experience and
his vision. If his vision gets too far out ahead of his nation’s
experience, he will lose his mandate. But if he hews too close to the
conventional, he will lose control over events.”
Obama has gone from the first of these dangers to the second.
In his first two years in office, he was manifestly
so far removed from America’s experience and ideals that he lost the
election of 2010. His big spending, overregulation, government
takeovers and bailouts and healthcare program cost him his mandate.
But, in his State of the Union speech, he hewed so close to the
conventional that he will now lose control over events.
His speech marks the real end of his presidency and the ascendancy of
congressional government led by the House Republican agenda.
A president’s major power is his ability to set the national agenda.
But Obama’s State of the Union agenda was so boring, mundane,
conventional and recycled that it will not capture either the national
imagination or even center stage. It cannot drown out the drama of
Republican efforts to slash spending, repeal ObamaCare, roll back
federal regulations, block carbon taxes, kill union card-check and free
community banks from regulatory paralysis. The ball is now in the
Republicans’ court.
The central mission of the Clinton comeback was to eradicate the memory
and record of 1993-94. The compelling agenda spelled out by the
president captured the nation’s attention and blotted out his early
failures. Welfare reform, deficit reduction, tobacco regulation and
Clinton’s second two-year agenda stole the stage from HillaryCare, gays
in the military, Waco and the Clinton tax increases.
But as the Republicans repeal or defund the discredited Obama programs
of 2009-10, they will assure that these failed initiatives dominate the
election of 2012. If Obama opts for stalemate -- his only alternative
to surrender if the GOP holds firm -- he will just prolong the shelf
life of these issues and assure that they will provide the issues in
2012 -- to his detriment.
On another level, Obama’s speech was a plea for a second chance. But
his opposition to the Republican agenda will belie his moderation and
will show it to be the same sleight of hand as was his vague embrace of
change during his presidential campaign. Americans believe in the old
adage: “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.” They
will give a president a second chance, but not a third one.
In the meantime, a star was born in the Republican reply delivered by
Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan. His articulation of conservative principles
was the clearest and most compelling I have heard since Ronald Reagan.
The force of his delivery, the reasonableness of his manner and the
positive tone with which he undermined and discredited Obama’s program
were all admirable. When he said that the president’s spending programs
were “stimulus repackaged as investments” he rebutted the bulk of the
president’s speech. Ryan, who swears he won’t run for president, may
find himself drafted.
Obama’s proclamation that he had “broken the back of the recession”
will inspire howls of disbelief and ridicule throughout the nation.
With 9 percent-plus unemployment, how can a president say these words
with a straight face?
To Obama’s credit, this was the first pro-American speech he has given,
embracing American exceptionalism, celebrating the American Dream and
honoring our servicemen and women -- boilerplate for any other
president, but unusual for this one. His calls for recruiters to be
allowed on campus, his rejection of earmarks and pledge to veto them
and his embrace of medical malpractice reform were the only good points
in his speech.
This speech was not enough to save this presidency.
|
|
|
|
