President Obama's First 6 Months

We’re coming up on the 6 month mark for President Obama (he was sworn in on Jan. 20). And, rather than focusing on the good things he has done (I've dwelt on some in past notes), I thought I’d take a step back and think big picture:

I was reading this article <http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-financial-regs16-2009jun16,0,4262249.story&gt; this morning, paused and scratched my head wondering: “how did we arrive in such a surreal time and place where the President of the United States can propose such a policy with a straight face?” “What planet did I land on?”

My mind flashed back to other articles I have read in the recent past:

- Economic Recovery: http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/2009/06/03/the-failure-of-obamanomics/
- French and German Relations: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6434141.ece & http://www.upi.com/news/issueoftheday/2009/04/02/Sarkozy-Merkel-challenge-Obama-at-G20/UPI-68951238681349/
- British Relations: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article6480320.ece
- Indian Relations: http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/65141/sumit-ganguly-and-s-paul-kapur/the-end-of-the-affair

Now, I know it’s a dangerous thing to compare Presidencies, because events are fluid, and circumstances don’t simply “change” around the world because of an election in the United States.

I have observed that the transition from Ike to JFK (one president and party to another) was actually the transition from one right person for the time and situation to another right person for the new time and situation. Ike was the right guy with the right background to deal with the issues of the 50s, while JFK deftly handled issues in the world as events and conditions evolved (over a period of time) into the 60s.

So, with that in mind, I have observed this presidential and party transition from Bush to Obama with great interest, recognizing that a different party label doesn’t always make a traumatic transition.

The Dick Morris blog posted above regarding the economic recovery is there as a device for me to state that I had reservations about the passage of the TARP by Congress during the waning hours of the Bush Administration. Morris’s observations highlight that while one Administration can put us on an ill-conceived path, the scope of that error can be magnified 10-fold by the next Administration building up, and expanding on, that original error. (For more on the economic “valley of the shadow of death” into which we may be galloping, see <http://www.forbes.com/2009/05/26/debt-credit-rating-budget-deficit-opinions-columnists-aaa.html>.)

The other articles (on French, German, British, and Indian relations) are somewhat of a surprise to me. Somebody can correct me if I’m wrong, but even though the “average protesting Joe” in Europe wasn’t too fond of President Bush, the leaders personally got along well with him. Tony Blair and George Bush will likely remain pen pals in retirement; President Sarkozy came to America - while it was trendy in foreign nations to bash America – and gave a speech before a joint session of Congress about the greatness of America that made me weep (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2007_record&page=H13210&position=all); and, unbeknownst to me until I stumbled across the “Foreign Affairs” article, India and President Bush enjoyed a superb relationship.

All of these allies’ leadership have been “snubbed”, “ignored”, “bypassed”, or otherwise offended by President Obama (and, I’ll ignore State Department’s “rest button” incident with Russia because it was Secretary Clinton, and it was funny <http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.9ca28ad2530b0d0029e1304762eca18f.8c1&show_article=1>).

Is it lack of experience (something that most Presidents - except Ike - need to grapple with – to one extent or another – when first taking office)? Is it that these foreign nations (or their leaders) are jealous of Obama’s popularity with the people, or otherwise easily offended? Or is it that President Obama is presumptuous in his ability to jump into the deep end of the pool with seasoned international players? Or something else?

What ever your personal thoughts on the question may be, it is surprising to me at how quickly and how often President Obama has stepped on toes. There’s no doubt that he can impress the masses. (Some people can do that, while they struggle with individual relationships. Others have superb relationships with individuals, but can’t persuade a group of people to support apple pie. Some can do both, and a few miserable wretches can’t do either.) Obama, so far, has demonstrated he has challenges with individual persuasion. (By the way, Ike could do both. And so could JFK. Which leads me to paraphrase Senator Lloyd Bentsen when he said: “Senator[/President Obama], you’re no Jack Kennedy!”)

So, back to where I started. “How did we get to this surreal spot?” The radical economic proposals to our nation’s economy may or may not be necessary – I’m not an economist. I don’t know. But I’m inclined to be concerned about it due solely to its significant departure from a known framework. And, regardless of your opinion of the President, anytime a major overhaul of anything is undertaken, it is only prudent (for the masses) to be a little concerned or cautious.

So, we’ve got a President of the United States who is proposing to (and, in some cases, already has) radically alter America’s economic foundations, and who is also stepping on the toes of almost every foreign ally he has met with. I say surreal.