In recent months the New York Times has been running news from the civil war years. At the very least I thought this was curious when I first noticed it. I though it was a little predictive and possibly incendiary later on during the squabbles over the debt. However, it did remind it’s readers of the parallels between this and that time. An increasingly angry piece of our nation growing louder and more insistent over what they perceived to be an erosion of “American” values and a lessening of their status. As I’ve written before, there will probably not be a another civil war or revolution and if there was, as with the Civil war, it probably wouldn’t turn out the way those who call for it expect.
However it is interesting to note that there are many distinct perspectives on our current situation. Different “world views” colliding loudly, all of them claiming to see the situation as clear as day.
For example the current President is seen by the far left as weak, abrogating his authority as a leader and being led by elitists. The far right sees him as an incompetent usurper, drunk with power and hell bent on “socializing” their home land. In each’s view all the facts are there “plain as the nose on your face.” And yet neither view can be completely true, if the other is even partially true.
Let’s look at three examples of the Presidents actions and see if there is light in either view.
Libya
First, Libya. The circumstances are certainly strange that have brought the US in to the conflict in this North African nation. We begin with the events around the area that notably began in Tunisia spreading to Egypt and then to several other countries including Libya. The Libyan leader proclaims that the revolutionaries will be crushed and proceeds to continue a campaign to do exactly that.
The UN gets involved at the behest of a league of Arab nations, and the US commits to military support which it lends almost immediately. President Obama clearly supports this effort and authorizes the necessary troops and equipment. Although unlike just about any other recent conflict, except Bosnia, the US has no “Boots on the ground” instead providing air support and drone missions. The bulk of the military action is undertaken by French and English forces. The move was controversial to be sure, especially after two conflicts in the region where we took the lead and adding additional expenses we certainly don’t need, although they are minor in comparison to other conflicts. It was however, clearly in line with the Presidents priorities for the Middle East, as outlined in his Cairo speech.
Congress must approve any declaration of war. Congress must approve any military expenditures within 60 days of hostilities. Instead a motion to cease hostilities is defeated in Congress and the next day a motion to not further impede expenses for this conflict is passed. So the President clearly got his way on this issue and a humanitarian crisis is averted and the heat dies down. What are we to make of that? Is this the incompetent leader drunk with power or the toy leader caving to the elitists? Or does it have more to do with Congress in this case?
Deficits
Next let’s look at the first round of deficit negotiations. The President releases his own deficit commissions recommendations and then seems to stand back from the fray. This brings forth the Ryan plan from Congress, nobody really likes it but it is a substantive plan. The wrangling begins and the plan looks more and more extreme, all the while giving the President ample time to shoot holes in it. The plan becomes a kind of conservative wish list for a new and less intrusive government, and the American people get time to look it over.
The press is not good on Ryan’s plan, and even his own constituency gets a “media moment” to grumble about it. Did the President get his way on that one too? Or was that more to do with Congress? Certainly members of Congress on both sides of the isle have derided the President for not having his own plan, but the question then becomes why developing plans on changing the way Congress spends the money it approves and removing spending already approved in budget after budget is somehow the responsibility of the President. At any rate it’s all to easy to forget the findings of the debt commission, which was created at the President’s request and led by the vice president.
Debt Ceiling
Last let’s look at the debt ceiling debate, which is a conflict it is my fervent hope that we are almost through. Here in direct negotiations with both parties the President calls on them time and time again to produce substantive results, and then in the final week backs off and instead calls on the American people to “let your voice be heard.” We respond to those calls, by flooding the email servers and switchboards of Congress with over 30,000 calls an hour, twice. First Tuesday the day after the President’s televised address and then again Saturday after his Friday address. Magically, on Sunday reports of substantive progress are made. By Monday morning a frame work agreement is reached. However, this agreement contains an allowance for the President to raise the debt limit over the objections of Congress. It’s possibly the last remnants of the McConnel plan which allowed Congress to vote against everything and the President to veto their votes and do it anyway. Who won that one? It may be far too soon to tell but it’s clear that both sides of Congress, and the President took a beating. However, it did get done and there are sighs of relief all over Europe and the rest of the planet this morning. Even if it takes another week to work out the details, for now, all is better if not well. The leaders of both major parties are in support and the Tea party is painted into a corner, dammed if they do and dammed if they don’t.
Besides the obvious tilting of power to the Executive branch by a Congress reticent to be making the hard and vote loosing decisions, it makes me wonder if the President isn’t playing a very canny game here. Especially when he was the first to dismiss the 14th amendment ploy to raise the debt ceiling, which surely would have made him out to be exactly the “drunk with power” executive that many of his detractors say he is. He also avoided being the “Straw horse” for a target practice, and got Congress themselves to “put some skin in the game.”
But while the President does seem to be winning the political advantage in case after case, he’s clearly not wining the popular one. Even though polls show most of America stands with the President in most of his positions, a balanced approach to the debt limit and deficit reduction, a concentration on American infrastructure and investment as a salve for the current economy and so on, he has sunk to “Bush” level approval ratings. And yet when he calls, the people respond, overwhelmingly. What do we make of that?
It is my belief that this Presidency will be one of the most discussed in the next 100 years. This is certainly one of the most difficult times in our nation’s history. We have calls for radical restructuring from both the right and left, two major conflicts dragging on and on as well as a minor third in full swing, a serious recession eating away at our own as well as the world’s confidence in us and uncomfortably high unemployment with no clear end in sight. What president can we name that had such a time to preside in?
Copyright Prentiss Gray 2011
Prentiss Gray is a writer and columnist and currently writes the Domesti-Tech Blog for Gannett. He can be reached through his website at www.prentissgray.com
Prentiss Gray
Prentiss Gray is a writer/columnist/blogger from New Jersey. After 27 years as a Information Systems consultant and the death of his wife of 21 years, he returned to his roots as a writer, creating the national column Adventures of the Lone Dad/ Daddy chronicles. He now Blogs for Gannet on domestic technology, and writes feature pieces and stories for general publication. He is a member of the American Society of Journalists and Authors and contributes to Bloomberg News, Daily Record, Gannett and the Tribune Syndicate.
Follow Me:
I think the majority don’t want to lower the deficit, rather they want the deficit eliminated completely. That seems to be what I run into most, regardless of political slant. I also think that the majority feels that our elected minions are out of touch, not doing their jobs, and suck pretty much.
The thing I find most disturbing is that at the climax of this debate, we hear very extreme commentary all over the place. In an event where Gabrielle Giffords votes for the first time since her unfortunate event, we hear garbage. There were many criticizing the “extreme speech” which “caused” Giffords to be shot. Now I hear how the tea party folks are “strapping dynamite to the nation” “Holding a gun to the Presidents head” “terrorists hell bent on destroying the nation” and other such crap. I am so tired of this kind of ad hominem BS from the political arena, whether Dem or Rep. And I am also tired of this attack mentality.
I think Obama sucks and has done a lousy job. I also think that Congress sucks and has done a lousy job. I think most of the media sucks and have done a lousy job. I think most of the nation agrees with me. And you will not see partisanship in my commentary, as lately partisanship sucks.
While I first read a veiled commentary comparing some in the debate to the Confederates, and I think that intentionally or un-intentionally that is there, I also notice that you admit the Ryan plan was substantive if not so desirable, with little substance anywhere else. Obama has no plan and never has, his budget was defeated 97-0? or some such. So much for his plan, or leadership for that matter. The plan which passed isn’t any more than a BS solution either.
That said, no REAL solution is going to be desirable. The horse is out of the corral already. Any adequate solution is going to be ugly, but so to is our situation…ugly.
I don’t think Obama is all that canny, neither are the members of Congress. They are self-serving for the most part, and so is our President.
I noticed that a while back Nancy Pelosi was calling the tax cuts the “Obama Tax Cuts” and such cuts were actually promised in the campaign. Now that it is politically convenient, they are suddenly the “Bush” tax-cuts again. In reality, what they are is OUR MONEY in our own pockets vs our money in someone elses pocket!
Prentiss I agree that all sides got a beating in this mess, and deservedly so. Can I ask that they get a bit more of a beating in 2012, nearly all of them need to be beaten! Maybe they will get the message. In the last two elections, we have beaten the politicians, first the Republicans, then the Democrats. They were not beaten because their opponents were so desirable; they were beaten because they sucked. And this buch reeks. We need to change the House, Senate and Presidency all in one shot, otherwise this childish and stupid crap will continue ad nauseum.
Your piece makes the reader think. I believe that is what you desire. But there will be a civil war if this keeps up. It probably won’t be at the end of a gun, but rather at the ballot box, as it should be. I would take 536 people randomly drawn from the social security rolls…how could we do much worse?!
Your really know how to cut to the chase Michael, few could have said it better. I don’t want any deficit spending. Is their any indication that next year I will be better able to pay it back? I have a feeling you are right about our politicians everyone is fed up with all of them.
Tonight’s news had street interviews in New York with ordinary citizens being asked about their take on the debt crisis and resulting Congressional action. One in seven had a modest understanding, the rest were clueless. The ignorance and disinterest of voters does not escape the politicians. This entire charade was simply political theater to make the other side look bad and ultimately avoid either party taking the full heat from the informed minority. I heard one reporter say “one percent of the people make things happen, nine percent debate what happened and 90% ask, what happened?” That sounds about right and is the reason democracies self destruct over time.
We have some very hard times ahead and the land of opportunity is being transformed into just another failed socialist state. People get what they deserve in most cases, and most of the people are going to learn that way too late.
Michael, I hear that a lot “replace them all, throw the bums out!” However we’ve seen what 80 or so freshman congressmen can do to the system, you sure you want more of that?
I don’t know. It depends on whether you view it as “…can do TO the system” or “can do FOR the system.”
I don’t like the system very much. I think it stinks, and if we keep too many of them, it will just stay the same, because they will train the newbies to do it their way. I don’t blame the debt ceiling mess on the freshmen. I blame it on the entrenched who have been screwing us all along, and still want to spend yet more of OUR money so they can look good and get re-elected.
I have been saying since the 1980′s that we spend too much, and should have NO deficits. I still feel that way. I don’t think confiscating more of OPM through taxes is the solution. (Though GE should pony up) Rather, we need a real discussion of the role of government, and a method of preventing overspending. Maybe a balance budget amendment is the answer, I’m not sure. But it is clear that what we have had isn’t working.
A clash of differing worldviews is not necessarily bad; it is how the politicians and the voters deal with it which will decide.
But Steve makes an excellent point…what makes us think we will be better able to afford our massive debts next year?
You could ask how to balance the budget, and I can give you an answer, by listing priorities in my view:
Gets paid 100%:
Social Security recipients because they PAID for it.
Military enlisted salaries because they EARN it.
Interest on the national debt because we OWE it.
EVERYTHING else gets CUT. Sorry, but that is the answer. We have to prioritize at home, and also as a nation. We can debate cutting some things more than others, but CUTTING is the solution. Raise taxes, I say NO. Cut deductions and loopholes ABSOLUTELY. Eliminate ethanol subsidies POSITIVELY. You get the idea where I’m coming from.
This baseline budgeting is BS. I wish our earnings worked that way, but that is not reality. We need to budget for reality, not for fantasies of what we think we might like it to be; providing everything for everybody and taking what we wish from whomever we wish. That is not the American way and it never was…