As Reagan's chief of staff so roughly put it "Perception is reality." And as the past twenty years have unfolded, that quote has proven to be prophetic in a way that is beyond belief. Reagan, as successful as he was, was always shielded by an image created by his political staff and propagated by a media that was more than willing to eat it up. I mean, an ex-movie star that was congenial and loved jelly beans? His persona was supposed to lead America into a grand Conservative movement that would minimize the size of the government to the point that it could be 'drowned in a bathtub.' And history has shown him to be a larger than life figure, still to this day. Hardly a speech by a prominent Republican figure goes by in which his name is not called out as a testament to how America should be governed. Hell, my father has always told me that 'Reagan made everyone proud to be Americans again.' And I cannot take that away from him, I did not live in that time so I have no point of view. I do know that he built up the largest national debt in history to that point. I know that his 'trickle down' economics are a remnant that has not proved to be an effective stimulus for the majority of the American population. But... the ultimate point that I am making is that he was president in a very fortunate time. He was hawkish in the highest degree towards the Soviets (almost dangerously) and was credited with the bankrupting of the USSR, although their collapse was not far off due to poor leadership. Hell, it's Reagan with his name on the airport at DC, certainly not Jimmy Carter, so his success has clearly been deemed so by 'those who know,' whoever they are. Image was key to Reagan and was key to George W. until the sheer ineptitude of his governance overrided it.
Image is once again vital when taking the incoming Obama Administration in context. Historical hyperbole has been given to Obama from the start. His orations evoke the power of JFK and Bobby Kennedy... Being the first African-American president, America seems to be near the proverbial mountaintop that Martin Luther King once spoke of. Even rumors of his naming Hillary Clinton to the Secretary of State post evoked Lincoln's 'Team of Rivals.' These expectations, along with Barack's rhetoric of massive fundamental change to the federal government as a whole seem to allow no room for failure in his governance. This may be possible, and I certainly voted and campaigned for him knowing that he gave us the best chance of success in the coming years. But, before we all exclaim that all our problems are solved because we have a man from the opposing party in the White House, let us take a look at all of the challenges that have been left on his desk by the departing administration:
1) We are fighting two wars. Iraq and Afghanistan are not like traditional wars in American history. There is no chance of achieving 'total victory' because there is not a standing army to combat, terror cells and insurgents are moving targets without exact numbers. Even General David Petraeus, the general behind the much vaunted 'Surge' has admitted that Iraq is not a situation where the term 'victory' can truly apply. Iraq is especially dire due to the fact that the Status of Forces agreement that was in place expires on January 1st of next year and the Iraqis have been unwilling to agree to another. If and when that expires, any actions that the US military takes would be unlawful and every soldier would be subject to war crimes. The election of Obama has made the Iraqis more open to another agreement, which is a good sign. A new agreement and a shift in mission from one of full military occupation to an international policing effort would help facilitate a gradual shift to the Iraqis and withdrawal of American troops.
But the real war still to be fought is in Afghanistan. The invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 under Bush was a travesty. Too few troops were allotted and corners were cut in the securing of the country. With all of the attention paid to Iraq, Afghanistan has fallen into worse shape than since we first invaded. Al Qaeda has risen again and the Taliban has regained standing. A lot of this has occured in the loose border that Afghanistan shares with Pakistan called Waziristan... This area is quite mountainous which allows almost no border enforcement, and here tribal Islamic leaders are slowly regaining strength and sending troops into Afghanistan. Here, some more troops are needed, but mostly more policing and greater economic aid to reduce the Afghan economy's need to lean on opiate poppy production from being their main export.
2) The ecomony is shit. Plain and simple... credit markets have not improved in the preceding weeks, even following the banking bailout. But why is this so? Didn't we, the taxpayers just give them $700 billion dollars to start doing that? And not just a blank check like Paulson, the Treasury secretary asked for but with OVERSIGHT! Well... that's simply not the case. Even though oversight was written into the legisation, reportedly nearly $300 billion of the alloted money has been spent and the regulatory positions that were meant to oversee the spending haven't been filled yet. This money is being spent on executive salaries and bonuses, company retreats and other avenues to help shareholders, not taxpayers. This is not a nationalized banking system, it is certainly the blank check that the banks did not deserve and could not be trusted with. Bailouts were done much more deftly in other countries. Gordon Brown in the UK, for example, reached an agreement with each bank he leant to that: 1)Taxpayers got 12% back on their investment annually; 2)The government gained members on the board to help in decisionmaking; and 3)A written agreement with each bank that they would start lending to small businesses and individuals. Paulson, on the other hand, was only able to negotiate a 5% return annually and got no agreement that banks would again start lending.
With this failed bailout, another is needed for homeowners who face foreclosure and others who are in dire need. The American auto industry is in desperate need for a cash infusion. One in ten jobs in this country is with one of the Big 3 auto manufacturers, and General Motors for one, has said that they do not have enough cash to last the remainder of the year. A bailout here, contingent on enforced regulation of the kinds of cars produced in the future (Green friendly hybrid production increased), would do a great deal towards righting the ship. That, along with increased government spending on public works infrastructure projects (roads, bridges, solar panels, etc.) would increase the number of jobs in the short term and help slowly bring the economy back.
3) Finally, Barack Obama has to juggle those two behemoths, achieve his promise on passing universal health care, work towards becoming a more green friendly nation and less energy dependent on oil from the Middle East and (most importantly) restore the people's faith and trust in its government. I've been reading a book regarding John McCain recently, and his belief in a 'greater cause' for government is a noble endeavor that I think bears following. His belief that a government should be clean and open and trustworthy is an end that our representative democracy deserves.
These goals, as well as the effectiveness of Obama in general, will be judged in the present by the 'storyline-based' media. This media is one of hardening partisanship on both sides. Almost anyone can see the conservative lean at Fox News and even I admit that MSNBC clearly leans to the left (Yay Olbermann and Maddow!). These are the same forces that helped shape Reagan's image towards sainthood. Say what you will about him, but after the attacks of 9/11, and the subsequent building up of national identity under a strong leader, George W. Bush had the highest approval ratings of any president at ANY time. That is a truly strong statement. But, as the wars drug on and episode after episode (Katrina, Warantless Wiretapping, TORTURE at Guantanamo), that image slipped away from him until he had nothing. This is the fear I have for the Obama administration, not from ineptitude but from outward catastrophe. With the economy slipping fast and no solution in place yet (I'm sorry, but that $700 billion is a lost cause), the ambitious changes that Obama promised will have to take a backseat to trying to prevent another Great Depression.
And if that depression hits and Obama cannot lift us out of it, what will his image and his legacy be? Will he be the man who promised the world only to have the rug pulled out on him by the past? Will he be blamed for the catastrophe? Rush Limbaugh and the other Conservative talking heads have called this the 'Obama Recession'; which is complete bullshit... I'm sorry, but Obama hasn't changed a single policy or changed a single bit of regulation. That 'honor' falls upon Alan Greenspan who recently admitted that 'his assumptions on the way the world works were wrong.' (Really? Who knew that rather than regulate themselves, banks would take risks in the name of outrageous profit?) Anyway, enough ranting... The media and the conventional wisdom of the time will all make their judgements regarding how this ambitious young president will handle these challenges.
I want to say that I am truly, TRULY hopeful that Barack Obama will be able to weather these storms, resolve the conflicts in the Middle East, right our economic ship and restore our national standing with its citizens as well as the world. His oratory skills are superb and he will be able to comfort the nation in a way that no one has before. I am willing to do my part to make this 'the world as it should be' as opposed to settling for 'the world as it is' and I hope that everyone else is as well. Regardless of party and partisanship, the main purpose of government is to make the society that its citizens live in a prosperous (and I would say equitable) one. Four years from now, I hope that we are on our way to becoming that nation for all.
This first blog post was more of a rant, so there weren't any particular sources that I took from. Suffice it to say, any questioned facts or figures probably came from Olbermann, Maddow, or dailykos.com. Maybe I'll do some of that citing stuff next time... but probably not.
