Standing Around

"Obama's aides say the president has a responsibility to explore policies that have a chance of passage, rather than merely making a political statement." -- Washington Post, 8/10/11

One of the most persistent memes in modern politics, perfectly embodied by the above quote, is what I've long called the Innocent Bystander Fable. It goes something like this: Democrats really want to do X, but they can't because it's "politically impossible," not "where the country is," and/or doesn't "have a chance of passing."

The idea is that even though Democratic politicians occupy the most powerful offices in the world, and even though X usually represents a policy 80 percent of rank-and-file voters support, Democrats are nonetheless powerless bystanders before political events rather than shapers of such happenings. In response, we are expected to nod our heads in agreement (as so many blind partisans do), somehow forgetting that these politicians are paid hefty taxpayer-funded salaries not to be bystanders, but to actually use the authority they have to make -- or at least seriously advocate -- change.

This Innocent Bystander Fable, of course, has long been the excuse the Democrats have used almost every time the party wants to avoid taking a stance on an issue.
~ from Don't Buy the "Democrats Are Powerless" Myth by David Sirota ~

I think anyone who understands anything about politics realizes that compromise typically is how legislation is passed. There are a multitude of constituencies in this country and it is not easy to meet all their needs with any legislative package.

But in order for compromise to be meaningful, the various sides must stake out their positions. When the sometimes extremes differences of opinion are showcased, it makes it far more clear where the middle ground lies. That is not to say that compromise becomes a piece of cake; each side fights to give up less ground than the other sides!

As the leader of the Democratic Party, President Obama has steadfastly refused to draw any type of substantive line in the sand. As Sirota points out, he behaves like a bystander who, in short order, gets backed into a corner with no chance of escape. So, he "caves" to conservative demands and then whines that he had no choice.

While his supporters try to explain away this seemingly inexplicable inability to negotiate his way out of a paper bag, I think the explanation is readily apparent: He is a conservative too! He doesn't want to draw lines in the sand because he agrees with the conservative agenda, but he doesn't want to be saddled with the eventual political fallout.

From a strictly political perspective, this is a savvy strategy. Shrink the federal budget, slash Medicare and Social Security, and give oodles of tax breaks to the rich, yet make it look like it isn't your fault.

But a bug has appeared in the ointment. Obama looks so ineffective that his poll numbers are tanking. Over the weekend, one poll came out that showed his approval rating has sunk to less than 40 percent. If his numbers keep going down, he made soon enter Dubya territory!

To combat the public's perception, he is running around the country now talking tough. His efforts may provide a slight bump in the polls -- in the short-term -- but he will soon return to his bystander strategy in the Fall and I expect his numbers will sag even further...which they should!