In 2008, the slogan was “Yes We Can.” For 2011–12, it’s “We Can’t Wait.” What happened in between? Candidate Obama, the vessel into which myriad dreams were poured, met the reality of governance.
His near–$1 trillion stimulus begat a stagnant economy with 9 percent unemployment. His attempt at Wall Street reform left in place a still too-big-to-fail financial system as vulnerable today as when he came into office. His green-energy fantasies yielded Solyndra cronyism and a cap-and-trade regime not even a Democratic Congress would pass.
Advertisement
And now his signature achievement, Obamacare, is headed to the Supreme Court, where it could very well be struck down, just a week after its central element was overwhelmingly repudiated (2–1) by the good burghers of Ohio.
So what do you do when you say you can, but, it turns out, you can’t? Blame the other guy. Charge the Republicans with making governing impossible. Never mind that you had control of the Congress for two-thirds of your current tenure. It’s all the fault of Republican rejectionism.
Hence: “We Can’t Wait.” We can’t wait while they obstruct. We can’t wait while they dither with my jobs bill. Write Congress today! Vote Democrat tomorrow!
We can’t wait. Except for certain exceptions, such as the 1,700-mile trans-U.S. Keystone XL pipeline, carrying Alberta oil to Texas refineries, which would have created thousands of American jobs and increased our energy independence.
For that, we can wait, it seems. President Obama decreed that any decision must wait 12 to 18 months — postponed, by amazing coincidence, until after next year’s election.
Why? Because the pipeline angered Obama’s environmental constituency. But their complaints are risible. Global warming from the extraction of the Alberta tar sands? Canada will extract the oil anyway. If it doesn’t go to us, it will go to China. Net effect on the climate if we don’t take that oil? Zero.
Danger to a major aquifer, which the pipeline traverses? It is already crisscrossed by 25,000 miles of pipeline, enough to circle the Earth. Moreover, the State Department had subjected Keystone to three years of review — the most exhaustive study of any oil pipeline in U.S. history — and twice concluded in voluminous studies that there would be no significant environmental harm.
So what happened? “The administration,” reported the New York Times, “had in recent days been exploring ways to put off the decision until after the presidential election.” Exploring ways to improve the project? Hardly. Exploring ways to get past the election.
Obama’s decision was meant to appease his environmentalists. It’s already working. The president of the National Wildlife Federation told the Washington Post (online edition, November 10) that thousands of environmentalists who were galvanized to protest the pipeline would now support Obama in 2012. Moreover, a source told the Post, Obama campaign officials had concluded that “they do not pick up one vote from approving this project.”
Sure, the pipeline would have produced thousands of truly shovel-ready jobs. Sure, delay could forfeit to China a supremely important strategic asset — a nearby, highly reliable source of energy. But approval was calculated to be a political loss for the president. Easy choice.
It’s hard to think of a more clear-cut case of putting politics over nation. This from a president whose central campaign theme is that Republicans put party over nation, sacrificing country to crass political ends.
Nor is this the first time Obama’s election calendar trumped the national interest:
Obama’s decision to wind down the Afghan surge in September 2012 is militarily inexplicable. It comes during the fighting season. It was recommended by none of his own military commanders. It is explicable only as a talking point for the final days of his reelection campaign.
At the height of the debt-ceiling debate last July, Obama pledged to veto any agreement that was not long term. Definition of long term? By another amazing coincidence, any deal large enough to get him past Election Day (and thus avoid another such crisis next year).
Tuesday it was revealed that last year the administration pressured Solyndra, as it was failing, to delay its planned October 28 announcement of layoffs until November 3 — the day after the midterm election.
A contemporaneous e-mail from a Solyndra investor noted: “Oddly they didn’t give a reason for that date.” The writer was clearly born yesterday. The American voter was not — and (s)he soon gets to decide who really puts party over nation and reelection above all.
Some days, I just don't know where to put my anger. Obama and his scandals (made worse by the media's complicity via selective reporting or silence) are going to drive me to meds. What's more, I'm about to go spend Thanksgiving with my very liberal in-laws. Dr. Krauthammer, kudos and thanks for another brilliant article. You're providing many of us with that psychiatric help we so desperately need as our country sinks into the abyss.
Iran's nukes seem as inviting as a soft warm sweater compared to the internal gutting that Obama's perpetrating on traditional America. He's the most successful enemy this country has ever had - and if he gets re-elected, it's game over.
I've found out that lots of drinking and hanging out with the kids playing Wii and RockBand actually is more fun and intelectually stimulating than engaging with liberal family members.
If President Obama had confidence in his policy decisions - whether related to the economy, healthcare reform or the environment - he wouldn't delay those decisions and/or the consequences of those decisions until after the 2012 election. As we're learning, there is a good a reason the not-so-popular provisions of his "urgent" healthcare reform bill won't take effect until 2013-2014. By delaying the bad news about Obamacare, its namesake won't suffer any backlash from it during the 2012 campaign; if he wins reelection, the bad news won't matter, as he's unlikely to seek public office after he leaves the White House; and if he's defeated in 2012, the bad news will be blamed on his successor and/or members of his or her administration for failing to properly implement the legislation.
He decided to kill the pipeline, not delay it's approval. His delay is of the confirmation of the kill. His electoral calculation was that killing it outright would cost him votes. It still should.
He doesn't seem to be courting centrist votes. Just trying to look vague enough to not earn too much disapproval. But yes, he absolutely runs the government to suit himself and his supporters, not the nation.
On the surface it would like look President Obama curried favor from the environmentalists at the expense of union support.
But for 3 years he has given the Unions billions and they have returned the favor. This decision was long vetted through the Union machine and the president was given the go ahead.
The Unions want environmentalist support to help assure an Obama re-election. That’s where the big payoff comes. If President Obama is reelected the Unions can count on billions more whether jobs are created or not.
These are the results when a near culturally bankrupt nation elects a know nothing, self-absorbed, narcissist as its leader who surrounds himself with the same.
The good news is the folks in the middle and on the Right are getting a crystal clear view of what the Democratic party in the U.S. today has become, to the extent they're paying attention.
Bambi is the epitome. Crony capitalism, gangster government, say anything to suit your purpose. Literally, say anything. The electorate (or at least their "broad tent" electorate) is dumb enough to believe it.
We can argue amongst ourselves all we want about who the true conservative standard bearer is or the best candidate but regardless of who emerges next year, watching the unbridled destruction these criminals have wrought on the country for just the past three years should be the only thing necessary to send people running to the polls.
40%+ approval rating? If people genuinely understood it would be 10%.
If the GOP really cared about the pipeline, they would take the matter to the Supreme Court, arguing that only Congress has the power "to regulate interstate commerce".
You are absolutely right!!! I think every state with serious oil and coal producing abilities should be filing a massive suit against the US Government and the Obama administration. They are working against the security of the nation, the security of the individuals they have taken an oath to protect and they are doing everything in their powers to undermine that oath. Not only should they be sued they should be impeached.
I say Issa and his team go for impeachment of Obama and look at taking Holder, Chu, Geitner and the rest of them to criminal court!! they are knowingly breaking the LAW (sworn to protect) and have serious criminal intent!!
These proceedings, hitting all at once would at least halt them until we vote them out and then continue the suits. They all belong in JAIL!!
When you have no core beliefs, and Obama certainly has none, as do none of the DC Democrats, it is simple to vote present. All that matters is the next election.
Our President is a coward. We can debate whether the pipeline is good or bad, and we realize that some issues have more gray area to them than others. But have you ever seen a man bring so much delay over decisions to such a level? All the time?
TransCanada and Nebraska have, I believe, reached an agreement to reroute the pipeline so as to avoid the Ogallala aquifer. This ends my objections, and should end many of my fellow Nebraskan's objections, to the pipeline. There is no ironclad guarantee that this pipeline won't leak, spill, or otherwise suffer some accident. Obama should follow Stonewall Jackson's advise and not take counsel of his fears. To do so results in nothing being done, which is the net effect of more studies.
Mr. Krauthammer misses the point. This has noting to do with cowardice. These delays are not the inevitable result of a large bureaucracy lumbering to a conclusion, or the cynical manipulations of a weak administration. They are the handiwork of an ideological cadre which finds itself in possession of power and is using that power to impose a new order on the nation.
Nations reach a point where governments cease being merely incompetent and inefficient and begin actively undermining the commonweal. We have reached that point. Of that I am certain. I am far less certain that the people understand this, less certain still that they have what it takes to "right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed," and deeply skeptical of the capacity of the Republican Party to lead in that effort. Things are bad and growing much worse.
90% of the problem will always be the government. Our founders knew this...unfortunately through education and the media, convention wisdom has evolved to 90% of the solution is the government.
Until we can change this narrative, it will only get worse.
Follow
Obama’s decision to wind down the Afghan surge in September 2012 is militarily inexplicable. It comes during the fighting season. It was recommended by none of his own military commanders. It is explicable only as a talking point for the final days of his reelection campaign.
