For a while now, the White House has been pushing the talking point that the presidency is inherently weak, that it can't accomplish much on its own, and that the true power in Washington is on the Hill, where the President has little to no influence.
The White House pushed that spin again today in the Washington Post:
White House advisers say Democrats need to understand that Obama is not all-powerful.
First off, that is an amazingly naive and dangerous talking point. Where in life do you achieve success by telling everyone how little power you have?
Second, it's simply untrue. The Bush example, which we've talked about many times before, gives truth to the lie. George Bush was many things, but impotent was not one of them. Did he push good policies? No. Did he get what he wanted far too often? You betcha. And
Bush had only between 50 and 55 GOP members in the Senate during the height of his effectiveness. That is not to say that Obama should emulate George Bush's conservativeness. It is to say that he should emulate Bush's strength. Much of what Bush did he did legally, via his rubber-stamp Congress. The President has an awesome amount of power, if he recognizes it and knows how to use it.
The article continued:
"There is this sense on Capitol Hill that somehow the president can go out and make a speech and everything just magically becomes better," said a senior White House adviser who requested anonymity in order to speak frankly. "If there is a lesson out of the Massachusetts race, it is the people on Capitol Hill have to realize nobody can go win this for you. If you're going to cast the vote, then you have to be prepared to argue why it was the best vote."
Pot calling kettle on that one. When fighting back against accusations that the President didn't do enough on health care reform (or on gay rights, or any other issue), the most-often cited talking point is how many speeches, town hall meetings, YouTube videos the President did on the issue's behalf. Left out of the discussion is just what those speeches, meetings and videos actually said - whether the President endorsed and pushed for specific policy changes, rather than general principles that could be applied to any outcome, no matter how weak. And whether the President did anything substantive to actually push for specific legislation, lobbying members of Congress, etc.
Read More......