Obama’s Re-Election Campaign: Destroying the Country to Save It

Much of the discussion about this Jeff Zeleny piece has focused on Obama’s apparent consideration of cutting regulations that “affect the economy.”

The president intends to offer at least some progressive proposals to help regain a fighting posture that he has not had since the health care debate, but a provision is also being discussed to place a new moratorium on some regulations that affect the economy, excluding health care and financial rules. The proposals are likely to infuriate an already unhappy Democratic base. [my emphasis]

Greg Sargent suggests we ought to wait to see precisely what Obama means by this; I agree, not because I have any faith in Obama, but because the syntax of this line is so strange. Does Zeleny mean “moratorium on new regulations”? A “moratorium–does that mean temporary or permanent–on existing regulations”? Who is doing the discussing here, Mr. Passive Voice Journalist?

In short, I think Zeleny has failed his job as stenographer.

Which is why I’m even more intrigued by this passage.

The Republican candidates, collectively and in distinctive ways, continue to cast him as the foil against whom they ran so successfully in 2010: a big-government liberal who has expanded regulations, created uncertainty for business and failed to revive the economy, with millions more Americans out of work than when he took office. They portray him as an unsteady leader who is unequipped to turn around a country in economic crisis. [my emphasis]

Again, the meaning here is unclear: Who is the “they” here? Does Zeleny mean to invoke the themes all Republicans used to run against Obama in 2010? Or just the ones running for President. I’m not sure Ron Paul “ran against” Obama in 2010, though Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry did. Both complained about health insurance reform, but largely in terms of “freedom” and (particularly in the case of Perry the separatist, state’s rights), not regulations. Perry complained about emissions restrictions, which is certainly a regulation, but Obama’s already caved on that front.

Both Bachmann and Perry got caught hypocritically replying on government pork while attacking Obama’s stimulus bill, and it’s fair to say that Perry used stimulus funds to balance TX’s budget, and given the number of government jobs TX has relied on, it’s therefore safe to say Obama’s stimulus created jobs Perry is taking credit for.

And both Bachmann and Perry called Obama a socialist.

But the theme ignores one of the big things Republicans, as a whole, ran against Obama on in 2010: “cutting Medicare” (in the health insurance reform).

Which makes me wonder whether this interpretation of the 2010 election is Zeleny’s … or the Obama team’s?

It seems a critical issue because some seems to have simplified the reasons for the Democrats’ shellacking in 2010, particularly given that voters still largely blamed Bush for the economy in 2010 (though they’re doing so less now).

In any case, if Obama thinks he can embrace policies that will stop two fools who called a President who has coddled banksters “a socialist” from repeating that claim–if Obama believes that spoiling our air and water will make Bachmann and Perry be nice to him–it’s simply not going to work.

But I do worry that’s what he has in store.

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

13 Responses to Obama’s Re-Election Campaign: Destroying the Country to Save It

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
Emptywheel Twitterverse
emptywheel Incidentally, those of you tweeting Clinton emails: Any idea whose FOIA liberated them?
1mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @RMFifthCircuit Nope, not when there is a perjury trap hanging in the lurch and a nakedly obvious solution via obstruction. Amazing.
4mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @RMFifthCircuit Relative intransigence of the NFL has to stick in Berman's craw. Know a lot of judges+such appearances do sometimes matter.
6mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @kevinjonheller Have you placed bets on whether he'll end up working for GOP POTUS candidate or Tom Cotton?
7mreplyretweetfavorite
JimWhiteGNV RT @emptywheel: See Something Say Something: Who's gonna tell FBI that a guy ON PROBATION is materially supporting al Qaeda? http://t.co/qc
8mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Also, if Petraeus is materially supporting Al Qaeda, does that mean KKR also is? https://t.co/3yP3ZV4del
9mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel See Something Say Something: Who's gonna tell FBI that a guy ON PROBATION is materially supporting al Qaeda? http://t.co/qc8bKKGCeB
10mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel If Petraeus were Muslim and 17 this would constitute material support for whomever Obama claims we're at war against https://t.co/eOeiIJFQtp
11mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @onekade Right, on Israel you should read @MoonofA.
13mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @onekade "They" being Israel or US? The latter, yes, the former, no, unless you count arming people you know will flip.
18mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @JJGomez127 But that's what the whole plea deal was about. Remaining "relevant."
18mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Other thing is you know people beyond Israel and Petraeus are thinking this. https://t.co/nG1k9t2MN9
20mreplyretweetfavorite
September 2011
S M T W T F S
« Aug   Oct »
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930