Remember the good old days of 2010, especially last fall and summer when The White House and Members of Congress were getting along so well, holding hands, singing “Kumbaya” and generally working in a bipartisan manner for the good of America?
Yeah, me neither.
But all of a sudden it is the 10-15 percent of Congress who identify themselves as “Tea Party” members and who just arrived at the Capitol in January who are mucking up the works; generally causing all sorts of havoc; and destroying the American and global economies. At least that is the impression you would get if you spent anytime watching MSNBC or, God forbid, tuning into “Face the Nation” or “Meet the Press” on Sunday and listening to the President’s spin masters, including the pitiful David Axelrod and the Massachusetts Senator who has become a caricature of his own self, John Kerry (who, by the way, in case you forgot, served in Vietnam).
Here is what Axelrod said:
“It was the right thing to do to avoid that default. It was the wrong thing to do to push the country to that point. And it's something that should never had happened. And that clearly is on the backs of those who were willing to see the country default, those very strident voices in the Tea Party. And by the way Bob, let me say one other thing - not one of the Republican presidential candidates stood out in opposition to that. Not one of them said let's compromise and be responsible about this.
Kerry was even worse:
“I believe this is, without question, the "tea party downgrade." This is the tea party downgrade because a minority of people in the House of Representatives countered even the will of many Republicans in the United States Senate who were prepared to do a bigger deal, to do $4.7 trillion, $4 trillion, have a mix of reductions and, and reforms in Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid; but also recognize that we needed to do some revenue. I think this is one of the most telling, important moments in our country's history right now.”
Let me repeat: The Tea Party members are 10-15 percent of Congress. Blaming them is kind of like blaming the other team’s cheerleaders for your loss.
President Obama has become Judith Viorst’s Alexander of “Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day” children’s book fame. Except that the bad experience isn’t just lasting a day or a week or a month, for that matter. He lives in perpetual “Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day” land and it does not look like there is a sunny day at the Jersey Shore anywhere in his future. And the hits just keep on coming as 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this afternoon that Health Reform’s individual mandate violates the Federal Constitution. (The children’s book reference is especially apropos given the President’s comments today in Michigan on how to solve the debt problem: "Everybody's got to chip in," he said. "That's fair. You learn it in kindergarten.")
But the President is the problem. He blames people. He has mastered the blame game. If he is not blaming the Tea Party or Republicans, he is blaming the Tsunami or something called “the Arab spring.” And, of course, there is still some currency in blaming George W. Bush and conservatives in general.
But none of that will get the President to a better day.
Perhaps this will: Now that the 12 Congressional members of the debt commission have been appointed, the President should meet with them and say:
Get to work. I look forward to your recommendations. Here are a few rules I personally believe you should follow. They will help you reach agreement. Remember, language matters. Trust me.
Don’t refer to tax policy as “loopholes.” At one time, these so-called “loopholes” were “incentives” that Congress believed would create jobs and improve the economy. If they have outlived their usefulness or are no longer accomplishing their goals, let’s get rid of them. But if they still work in some instances, seems to me we could use a job or two in this country.
Don’t use the phrase “fair share” when it comes to who should pay taxes and how much. I will bet a lot of money that we will never agree on the what that means. YOUR idea of fair is not mine.
Let’s dump the phrase “safety net.” What does it really mean, anyway? Perhaps it would be better if we simply said, ‘We should do what we can to help those who really need our help.’ Put a special emphasis on the word “really.”
And finally, if the deadline approaches, and we are close to an agreement, let’s just give ourselves some more time. Is there anything really wrong with that?
If the President does that, he just might have a very GOOD day sometime this winter or next November.
If he doesn’t, however, perhaps he should move to Australia. (Read the book.)
