Box-Checking Obama In a Liberal Cocoon
By Michael Barone
TownHall.com
It's unusual when a reporter sympathetic to a
politician writes a story that makes his subject
look bad. But Ryan Lizza of The New Yorker has now
done this twice.
The first time was in an article last April on
Obama's foreign policy in which he quoted a "top
aide" (National Security Adviser Tom Donilon? It
sounds like him) saying that the president was
"leading from behind" on Libya. Not what most
Americans expect their presidents to do.
Now, in an article based on leaked White House memos
marked up by Obama, Lizza has done it again.
Contrarian liberal blogger Mickey Kaus sums it up:
"The president's decision-making method -- at least
as described in this piece -- seems to consist of
mainly checking boxes on memos his aides have
written for him."
A $60 billion cut in the stimulus package? "OK." Use
the reconciliation process to pass the health care
bill? A checkmark in the box labeled "yes."
Include medical malpractice reform in the health
care bill? The man who as an Illinois legislator
often voted "present" writes, "We should explore
it."
According to Lizza, Obama prefers getting
information and making decisions by staying up late
and reading memos rather than meeting with people --
a temperament that's a liability because face time
with the president is one of his major sources of
political capital.
Lizza's reporting undercuts the stated thesis of his
article: that Obama sought to bring bipartisan
governance to Washington, but was foiled by
Republicans' partisan intransigence.
Evidence that Obama ever seriously considered
Republican approaches is minimal in the New Yorker
article. The alternatives Lizza describes Obama as
considering are for even more spending and
government control, such as a much bigger stimulus
package.
He mentions just in passing that Obama "had decided
to pursue health care reform" as well as the
stimulus package -- a choice that inevitably made
bipartisanship harder to achieve.
At one point Lizza does quote Obama writing on a
memo, "Have we looked at any of the other GOP
recommendations (e.g., Paul Ryan's) to see if they
make any sense?" Another president might have looked
at Ryan's proposals himself or might even have
called him on the phone.
George W. Bush, in contrast, worked with Democrats
-- and sometimes even talked with them -- on his
education plan, his tax cuts and the Iraq War
resolution. He even tried, unsuccessfully, to
negotiate with them on Social Security.
And on Obama's failure to reach a "go big" budget
agreement with House Speaker John Boehner last
summer, Lizza presents only the White House talking
point: "conservative colleagues rebelled, and
Boehner withdrew." He doesn't mention Republican
claims that Obama upped the ante, demanding more tax
increases.
Lizza's White House sources apparently didn't leak
any memos about some of Obama's more recent actions,
but his article provides a jumping off place for
understanding them.
As in Chicago, Obama seems to live in a cocoon in
which Republicans are largely absent, offscreen
actors that no one pays any attention to.
His personal interactions are limited to his liberal
Democratic staff -- and to the rich liberals he
meets at his frequent fundraising events. He has
held more of these than George W. Bush, who in turn
held more than Bill Clinton.
Two decisions in particular seem tilted toward rich
liberals. One was the disapproval of the Keystone XL
pipeline from Canada, even after it survived two
environmental impact statements.
Obama says he wants more jobs and to reduce American
dependence on oil from unfriendly foreign sources.
The pipeline would do both, and is endorsed by labor
unions. But Robert Redford doesn't like Canadian tar
sands oil. Case closed.
The other astonishing decision was the decree
requiring Catholic hospitals and charities' health
insurance policies to include coverage for abortion
and birth control. Here Obama was spitting in the
eyes of millions of Americans and threatening the
existence of charitable programs that help millions
of people of all faiths.
Catholic bishops responded predictably by requiring
priests to read letters opposing the policy. Who's
on the other side? The designer-clad ladies Obama
encounters at every fundraiser. They want to impose
their views on abortion on everyone else.
Obama fundraising seems to be lagging behind its $1
billion goal, and Democrats fear Republicans are
closing the fundraising gap. So Obama seems to be
concentrating on meeting the demands of rich
liberals he spends so much time with.