Yes, I know, it’s been quite a while since I have written anything for this blog. And, yes, many things have changed, but, again, many things remain the same. Since I posted Part One of this article; I have come to the revelation that there must be an addendum made to my thesis. A failure to mention Afghanistan or, moreover, the Bush-like policies President Obama has adopted would be irresponsible. These policies have brought Obama under intense scrutiny not only from Republicans, but, stunningly, Democrats as well. Many liberal Democrats are perturbed over the apparent policy of escalation in the Afghanistan Theater, his administration’s refusal to investigate alleged illegal CIA activities and close Guantanamo Bay. Presidential candidate Barack Obama promised to draw-down force in Iraq with the utmost expediency and close the Guantanamo Bay facility. But—as someone who voted for Mr. Obama—I attributed those statements to foreign policy naiveté and grandstanding from the stump.
As Ben Griffis pointedly discussed in his latest post, the brand of aggressive partisan politics the US is currently enduring is causing it to flirt with calamity. Barack Obama is both a victim of circumstance and of his own shortcomings; he didn’t choose to invade Afghanistan or Iraq, but he has not sought out—if they even willing to surface-- moderate Republican allies. His foreign policy so far has been a less hawkish version of that of Sen. McCain who was once highly respected for his pragmatism. President Obama should, however, avoid being a dove; while his administration does have a responsibility to work towards rebuilding the image of the U.S. globally, President Obama must avoid appearing weak. Likewise, the president must keep this same idea when formulating his domestic policies. President Obama, once again, is in a precarious situation due to his own faults and the faults of others. But Obama must demonstrate a willingness to muster more political clout and moxy, and, what’s more, demonstrate willingness to use such qualities in order to distance himself from hapless Congressional Democrats and illuminate those in GOP who have fecklessly taken up an anti-Obama platform.
As with Afghanistan and Iraq, President Obama needs to approach healthcare reform with an actual strategy. This is not an endeavor that should be pursued with the simplistic motivation to get the proverbial ball rolling on healthcare reform. Grand policy decisions, both at home and abroad, require immense pragmatism and critical strategic thinking. And while dealing with Congress does require an incredible degree of wheeling-and-dealing, such a process is regrettably conducive towards making compromises and concessions that often deteriorate the original strategy thereby damaging the subsequent byproduct thusly rendering it ineffective. George W. Bush’s administration seemingly did not have a penchant for critical thinking and strategy, and, thusly, left office with two misguided wars of which neither looks to be ending anytime in the near future. If President Obama seeks lasting reform, he and his administration need to learn the lessons from his predecessor and seek out specific, meaningful, and effectual reforms through a series of specific bills, not one big muddled bill.
