creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
David Sirota
David Sirota
25 May 2012
A Rare Admission That Money Trumps Everything Else

Headlines transmit information in its rawest form — and the best of headlines crystallize indelible truths.… Read More.

18 May 2012
Yes, We Can Walk and Chew Gum

One of the most overused metaphors in a writer's arsenal is the one about "walking and chewing gum at … Read More.

11 May 2012
Our Guns and Butter Economy

With the economy still struggling and the debates over how to fix the problem more intense than ever, one … Read More.

The Bizarro FDR

Share Comment

Barack Obama is a lot of things — eloquent, dissembling, conniving, intelligent and above all, calm. But one thing he is not is weak.

This basic truth is belied by the meager Obama criticism you occasionally hear from liberal pundits and activists. They usually stipulate that the president genuinely wants to enact the progressive agenda he campaigned on, but they gently reprimand him for failing to muster the necessary personal mettle to achieve that goal. In this mythology, he is "President Pushover," as The New York Times columnist Paul Krugman recently labeled him.

This storyline is a logical fallacy. Most agree that today's imperial presidency almost singularly determines the course of national politics. Additionally, most agree that Obama is a brilliant, Harvard-trained lawyer who understands how to wield political power.

Considering this, and further considering Obama's early congressional majorities, it is silly to insist that the national political events during Obama's term represent a lack of presidential strength or will. And it's more than just silly — it's a narcissistic form of wishful thinking coming primarily from liberals who desperately want to believe "their" president is with them.

Such apologism, of course, allows liberals to avoid the more painful truth that Obama is one of America's strongest presidents ever and is achieving exactly what he wants.

Obama is not a flaccid Jimmy Carter, as some of his critics insist. He is instead a Franklin Delano Roosevelt — but a Bizarro FDR. He has mustered the legislative strength of his New Deal predecessor, but he has channeled that strength into propping up the very forces of "organized money" that FDR once challenged.

On health care, for instance, Obama passed a Heritage Foundation-inspired bailout of the private health insurance industry, all while undermining other more-progressive proposals.

On foreign policy, he escalated old wars and initiated new ones. On civil liberties, he not only continued the Patriot Act and indefinite detention of terrorism suspects but also claimed the right to assassinate American citizens without charge.

On financial issues, he fought off every serious proposal to re-regulate banks following the economic meltdown; he preserved ongoing bank bailouts; and he resisted pressure to prosecute Wall Street thieves. On fiscal matters, after extending the Bush tax cuts at a time of massive deficits, he has used the debt ceiling negotiations to set the stage for potentially massive cuts to Social Security and Medicare — cuts that would be far bigger than any of his proposed revenue increases.

As hideous and destructive as it is, this record is anything but weak. It is, on the contrary, demonstrable proof of Obama's impressive political muscle, especially because polls show he has achieved these goals despite the large majority of Americans who oppose them.

Importantly, though, Obama himself has not suffered from equally negative polling numbers. While his approval rating is not terrific, he is in decent shape for reelection — and, more significantly, he has suffered only a minimal erosion of Democratic support. He is relatively popular, in other words, despite advocating wildly unpopular policies. Thanks to that reality, every one of his stunning legislative triumphs now has the previously unprecedented imprimatur of rank-and-file Democratic support.

In forging such bipartisan complicity with what were once exclusively right-wing Republican objectives, Obama has achieved even more than what he fantasized about when he famously celebrated a previous Bizarro FDR. In a 2008 interview with a Nevada newspaper, Obama lauded Ronald Reagan for "chang(ing) the trajectory of America" and "put(ting) us on a fundamentally different path."

Reagan was a truly strong executive — but the Gipper was nothing compared to our current president.

David Sirota is the best-selling author of the new book "Back to Our Future: How the 1980s Explain the World We Live In Now." He hosts the morning show on AM760 in Colorado. E-mail him at ds@davidsirota.com, follow him on Twitter @davidsirota or visit his website at www.davidsirota.com.

COPYRIGHT 2011 CREATORS.COM


Comments

6 Comments | Post Comment
A bizarro column, especially "... polls show he has achieved these goals despite the large majority of Americans who oppose them." Is this a frank admission that bizarro liberal policies are not mainstream American tastes? No wonder Obama uses government agency regulation to strangle the economy and citizens. I guess in the world of elites there is no government by the people for the people, just soft tyranny by the few to benefit elitist vanity. The majority of Americans be damned.

Bizarro.


Comment: #1
Posted by: Tom
Thu Aug 4, 2011 12:28 PM
Tom, these "bizarro liberal" policies are not liberal at all. The so-called Health Care Reform bill was a rehash of the GOP platform in the 90s as well as Romneycare. He increased troops in Afghanistan, only to pull them out by the same amount & no more than that. He extended the Bush tax cuts & he got us involved in yet another war. Liberal? You obviously don't know the meaning of liberal. This recent deal was created by Obama and a small elite group of Republicans, not any other Democrats.

Point after point, Sirota illustrates how Obama has expanded all the Bush policies. How is they liberal?

And stop, Tom, with the "elite" this and "elite" that. Everyone knows that the corporate overloads you shill for are the real elites.
Comment: #2
Posted by: turtleposer@gmail.com
Sat Aug 6, 2011 10:11 AM
Sadly, President Obama's numbers remain up because the alternative is so awful. We support our present Democrats while holding our noses in disappointment.
Comment: #3
Posted by: Simon Ronald
Sat Aug 6, 2011 12:07 PM
If he is such a strong president why does he keep taking a Democratic like position and then bargaining it all away to the Republicans in congress. A leader can be either a great appeaser or a great agent for change. He can't be both. Obama can either have a historical biography that makes him loom more like Neville Chamberlain or Winston Churchill.

My grandparents always voted for FDR because they knew who he was and who he was fighting for. I will be voting for Barack because I know who the Republicans are and who they are fighting for.
Comment: #4
Posted by: Steven P
Sun Aug 7, 2011 10:04 AM
Interesting, but I'm not convinced by your cynical thesis that Obama is incredibly powerful and is getting exactly what he wants while deceiving his base with calculated Machiavellianism. I still believe Obama—though a compulsive appeaser and incompetent negotiator—is a progressive at heart ill-prepared to navigate the political and financial apartheid he's confronted with in Washington. You cannot “community organize” Congress and the vested interests of Big Business and Wall Street. There's nothing in Obama's past to suggest he's a crypto conservative or agrees with the right-wing political agenda. Obama may be more moderate than most progressives would like, but a right-winger in disguise?--No way!
Comment: #5
Posted by: Hemi Boso
Wed Aug 10, 2011 11:38 AM
I agree with all the rational, intelligent and thoughtful comments so far (of course, that excludes Tom who lives on planet Con).

Ultimately we may never know the truth, but in my assessment Obama is what used to be called a Moderate Republican (now extinct) who is more conservative on economic issues and more liberal on social issues. He came from the Chicago School (birth of neo-liberalism) after all. Perhaps under different circumstances in a different environment he would be more progressive, but he has surrounded himself with incompetent, right-leaning advisers and doesn't have the good sense/experience to know they are full of crap.

But I agree, he is not weak. Look at what he's fought for and how he fought for certain things: while he did not fight for a public option or single payer, he did go out and campaign for the watered-down gift to the health insurance industry; he did not fight to raise taxes on the rich (both last year and this year, though he did give lip-service to it) but he did pressure Democrats in congress to pass both the bad deal last year that extended the tax giveaways to the rich and the bad deal this year that made cuts to vital programs for the middle and lower classes while setting the stage for cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. He is not weak and he does not show any signs of wanting to do anything truly liberal. In fact, he seems to enjoy spitting on his base.

Like many others, I will still vote for him given the crazies running on the right. But I'm certainly not happy about being forced into the choice between bad and extremely bad.
Comment: #6
Posted by: A Smith
Fri Aug 12, 2011 11:13 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
David Sirota
May. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Roland Martin
Roland S. MartinUpdated 20 Jun 2012
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 28 May 2012
Steve Chapman
Steve ChapmanUpdated 27 May 2012

18 Sep 2009 Selective Deficit Disorder

4 Feb 2011 With Democracy or Against It -- There's No In Between

15 Apr 2011 Ikea Joins the Race to the Bottom