Subscribe to The Spectator

Monday 21 May 2012

Latest issue

Buy the current issue

Jobs at Telegraph

President Obama Meets Candidate Obama

Thursday, 28th January 2010

Well that was long. 70 minutes in fact. And, as the genre demands, there was a considerable gap between Presidential rhetoric and anything that is actually likely to happen. Do you really believe, now that Obama has promised this, that American exports will double in five years? Of course not.

Ezra Klein has a useful summary of the laundry list of promises here and the full text is here. Some of those pledges - the call for new nuclear power stations and for more off-shore oil exploration - were co-opted from the Republican playbook but that doesn't make them any more likely to happen. Nor, despite a reference to doing so, will this Congress really push for trade liberalisation. And, of course, there was the usual bashing of lobbyists and foreigners that we've also come to expect on these occasions.

Others were simply bitterly ironic. For instance, his declaration that when it comes to education, "In this country, the success of our children cannot depend more on where they live than their potential" sits poorly alongside his administration's role in killing DC's tiny, but popular, school voucher programme.

Elsewhere, the pledge to end the ban on gays serving in the military though, as he rightly put it, "the right thing to do" was downgraded to a commitment to "work with Congress and the military." Immigration reform came and went in a single sentence, hardly suggesting that the White House wants to move on such a contentious issue this year.

And although there was a rhetorical concession to conservatives - when families must tighten their belts, so must the government - this was, as might be expected, a very Democratic speech. There was no suggestion that there might be limits on what the government can achieve or areas in which the government could do less (this actually broke with precedents set by both Carter and Clinton). Indeed, despite concerns over the long-term fiscal situation, Obama called for major increases in spending across the board. Not by name or number, of course, but by impication - if, that is,  many of these promises are meant to be considered more than the standard kind of aspirational boilerplate we expect on these occasions.

And while lip service was also paid to the notion that there could be good faith disagreement with the President; the underlying message was that such opposition is only and always obstructionism. It's not, for instance, as though there aren't alternative health plans out there. Granted, not many of those ideas have come from Congressional Republicans but still...

Much of the speech was oddly bland. There were few memorable lines, though "How long should we wait? How long should America put its future on hold?" perhaps came closest to recapturing the fierce urgency of now that animated Obama on the campaign trail. This too was a call to arms for action and it was noticeable that Obama seemed to side with House Democrats rather than his former colleagues in the Senate. As an indication of where his heart lies that seems appropriate.

And yet the speech was also punctuated with curious moments of levity that made it seem as though this was Obama the Candidate addressing a townhall meeting in Iowa. This wasn't necessarily ineffective, merely notable, and one did wonder what the reaction migth have been had George W Bush seemed quite so amused by his own jokelets and off-the-cuff asides.

No matter. After a downbeat opening - deliberatly so - Obama responded to the polls by concentrating on the economy. His defence of a stimulus package that's not hugely popular was effective. If he declined to offer much of a way forward on health care then that may simply reflect the fact that there's been so much talk on health care already.

Foreign policy received very little, even perfunctory, attention. Understandably, given the electorate's economic concerns. Missing was any mention of Israel and Palestine or Guantanamo Bay or Pakistan or Cuba. Well, you can't cover eveything and, alas, like his predecessor Obama's brief mention of human rights continues to rub against American support for leaders such as Hosni Mubarak. There are good reasons for that support, for sure, but...

On Iran there was merely the vow that "as Iran’s leaders continue to ignore their obligations, there should be no doubt: they, too, will face growing consequences." What those will be was left for another day.

Still, reasonably enough, he challenged Congress to do better and this and the peroration were the best parts of the speech. It's not a coincidence that they were also the bits that reminded one of the Obama we saw on the campaign trail. Thus:

So no, I will not give up on changing the tone of our politics.  I know it’s an election year.  And after last week, it is clear that campaign fever has come even earlier than usual.  But we still need to govern.  To Democrats, I would remind you that we still have the largest majority in decades, and the people expect us to solve some problems, not run for the hills.  And if the Republican leadership is going to insist that sixty votes in the Senate are required to do any business at all in this town, then the responsibility to govern is now yours as well.  Just saying no to everything may be good short-term politics, but it’s not leadership.  We were sent here to serve our citizens, not our ambitions. So let’s show the American people that we can do it together.  This week, I’ll be addressing a meeting of the House Republicans.  And I would like to begin monthly meetings with both the Democratic and Republican leadership.  I know you can’t wait. 
And this:
I campaigned on the promise of change – change we can believe in, the slogan went.  And right now, I know there are many Americans who aren’t sure if they still believe we can change – or at least, that I can deliver it.
Remember this - I never suggested that change would be easy, or that I can do it alone. Democracy in a nation of three hundred million people can be noisy and messy and complicated. And when you try to do big things and make big changes, it stirs passions and controversy. That's just how it is.
Those of us in public office can respond to this reality by playing it safe and avoid telling hard truths. We can do what's necessary to keep our poll numbers high, and get through the next election instead of doing what's best for the next generation.

But I also know this: if people had made that decision fifty years ago or one hundred years ago or two hundred years ago, we wouldn't be here tonight. The only reason we are is because generations of Americans were unafraid to do what was hard; to do what was needed even when success was uncertain; to do what it took to keep the dream of this nation alive for their children and grandchildren.

Our administration has had some political setbacks this year, and some of them were deserved.  But I wake up every day knowing that they are nothing compared to the setbacks that families all across this country have faced this year.  And what keeps me going – what keeps me fighting – is that despite all these setbacks, that spirit of determination and optimism – that fundamental decency that has always been at the core of the American people – lives on.  

Quite so. Here at last was the theme of the speech and the framework around which it could have been built. This, I think, would have been an even better opening than a conclusion. Sure, it reads as though it's the sort of thing any President might say but there was a conviction to Obama's voice at this moment, a seriousness of purpose and a hint of self-knowledge that lifted it above the commonplace and reminded one that there were many and good reasons why he won both the Democratic nomination and the Presidency in 2008.

Other reactions: Joe Klein loved it; Andrew Sullivan's live-blogging was pretty enthusiastic; the Reason crew less so, Steve Clemons wanted more economic populism, Jon Chait thought it dull, cheap and successful. Ezra Klein says the follow-through needs to match the speech, Toby Harnden says it was uninspiring.


 


Filed under: Americana (478 more articles) , Obama (365 more articles) , Washington (169 more articles)

Blogs: Martin Bright | Susan Hill | Melanie Phillips | Coffee House | Faith Based

Actions: Print this article  |  Email to a friend  |  Permalink   |   Comments (9)

Post this entry to:   del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Comments Post comment

ndm

January 28th, 2010 8:25am Report this comment

The 2*4 in the face of a Supreme Court sitting right in front of him:

-- Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests – including foreign corporations – to spend without limit in our elections. Well I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people, and that’s why I’m urging Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to right this wrong.

He went into this by ad-libbing a comment that went something like "I know about separation of powers and all that but ..."

ndm

January 28th, 2010 8:31am Report this comment

Jeffrey Rosen of The New Republic on the Supreme Court comment:

-- Even more significant is what it says about Obama's welcome readiness to attack the Court's conservative majority for its judicial activism in the future. The conservative justices may have calculated that they could strike down campaign finance restrictions without provoking a full-blown presidential backlash. But it takes only a few high-profile presidential attacks to tar a Court as activist in the eyes of history. (my emphasis on Rosen's no shit Sherlock moment)

Roy Smith

January 28th, 2010 9:11am Report this comment

Obama's most spectacular action was getting to the White House; now he is there we find he is has no action plan for the country that is workable.

Conservative Cabbie

January 28th, 2010 9:33am Report this comment

And once again, ndm defends government banning documentaries critical of government figures. Just the sort of thing needed in a democracy.

Conservative Cabbie

January 28th, 2010 9:40am Report this comment

This was the Whine of the Union. At best Obama makes a very conditional mea culpa:

"Our administration has had some political setbacks this year, and some of them were deserved."

Well that's big of you.

But then he lays into everyone else, including, disgracefully, the Supreme Court Justices. America's problems are everyone elses but his own. Bush, the Banks, Congressional Democrats, Congressional republicans, tv pundits. I wouldn't be surprised that in the original draft the American people got it in the neck too for not getting him.

If any speech made me realise what an arrogant and lame President this man is, this was the one.

And Anrew Sullivan was positive about Obama. Well gosh. News at 10.

Snowman

January 28th, 2010 12:15pm Report this comment

I watched the speech, and the one thing that hit me most was the ending of it, with Obama acknowledging the standing acclamation by his audience.

It strongly reminded me of Mussolini’s behaviour except that his (Obama’s) arm wasn’t raised as straight as that of the Italian orator. Coming to think of it, the delivery of the speech resembled that of the Duce, too. Sharp, short sentences, big gaps in between them. Impressive, but little scary.

I reckon the Republicans have more than a mountain to climb.

THX1138

January 28th, 2010 2:38pm Report this comment

CC

Wot so Supreme Court Justices are above criticism? Can I suggest that you have a look what the "wingers" have to say about Roe v. Wade

It was a great speech and reinforced my opinion that Obama is the right man to be leading America after the economic disaster of the Bush years.

Frank S

January 28th, 2010 3:06pm Report this comment

Still on track to be the worst president since Carter, his SOTU address is a strong contendor for being the worst in living memory. This commentator gets it: http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/01/28/a-self-reverential-state-of-the-union-address/

'The charm and aesthetic appeal have all but disappeared. And so his words came across as not only stale but surreal. It is as if Obama was speaking in a parallel universe.'

Ben

January 28th, 2010 5:09pm Report this comment

Wow. Alex, the scales have fallen from your eyes! The big question for the next two years is who will be the (non-Palin) Republican candidate, because Barry is there for the taking.

Post comment

Back to top

Cartoons

Tag Cloud

Search this blog

Alex Massie's blog archive

sponsored links

Spectator recommends

Spectator classifieds

THE PRESENT FINDER

1,700 Unusual Christmas Presents Request Catalogue 01935 815 195 Quote SPEC10 for 10% discount www.presentfinder.co.uk

OLIVE BRANCH FLORISTS

Pimilco based Florist with online ordering Web: www.olivebranch.net Tel: 020 7630 1868 Fax: 020 7233 8844

RUFFS Bespoke Signet rings

62 Shore Road, Warsash, Southampton, SO31 9FT Telephone: 01489 578867 Web site: www.ruffs.co.uk