The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

Yesterday, I noted that in post-Scott Brown victory chaos, members of the House and Senate were each saying that the ball was in the court of the other chamber. Given this, you'd think President Obama would want to take charge of the situation before his top domestic priority unravels. But instead, in his news conference this afternoon, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs passed the buck to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.

"They’ve got to figure out a path forward legislatively,” Gibbs said. "Each of them knows their chambers better than anybody else."

At the same time, Gibbs insisted that a comprehensive health care bill would pass, even though he wouldn't elaborate on what President Obama meant when he said that Congress should unite around the "core elements."

"The president believes it is the exact right thing to do by giving this some time,” he also said, "by letting the dust settle and looking for the best path forward."

Meanwhile, today President Obama spoke to announce new regulations on the big banks and called for a "forceful response" to today's Supreme Court decision -- both of which suggest he's eager to pivot to issues that would allow him to tap into populist anger that he's convinced fueled Brown's election.

The prospect that Brown could win the Senate election and change the political calculus in Washington was evident at least a week and a half before it actually happened. That's why it's incredible that the White House had absolutely no plan in place to manage the aftermath, allowing chaos to reign among Democrats, and all sorts of mixed messages to be spread. This is, I think, a good example of what happens when you elect somebody without executive experience.

View all comments (3) | Leave a comment

ncatty| 1.21.10 @ 5:07PM

He lacks executive experience, all right. Is the same true for his chief of staff and legions of advisors?

Scarlette| 1.21.10 @ 5:24PM

Why would Obama have a plan in place to manage the aftermath of a loss since in his own mind he is never going to lose. He doesn't seem to learn from experience.

SteveP| 1.21.10 @ 6:14PM

Obama voted present again. Gee, who'd a thunk it?
And then the "pragmatist" (read unprincipled opportunist) tried to tap into populist anger by misunderstanding what's going on and proposing more fascism.
Has there ever been anyone more tone deaf in American politics?

Leave a Comment

N.B. We encourage readers to share and discuss their thoughtful and relevant comments about this Spectator article. Comments are routinely monitored and will be deleted if profane, bigoted, or grossly impolite. Please be respectful. (And don't feed the trolls!) Thank you.

More Blog Posts by Philip Klein

http://spectator.org/blog/2010/01/21/white-house-passes-buck-to-con

ADVERTISEMENT

SPONSORED LINKS

Special Feature

Better that we become a nation of choosers rather than beggars. Our symposium on choice from the May, 2012 issue:

A Time for Choosing

James Piereson

The Road from Serfdom

Stephen Moore and Peter Ferrara

FLASHBACK TO: 1984

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

Meet the Flukes!

F. H. Buckley | 5.25.12

The Wisconsin Turning Point

Peter Ferrara | 5.23.12

In Search of Muhammad

Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi | 5.25.12

Age and Kyl

Quin Hillyer | 5.25.12

Follow Me

Jay D. Homnick | 5.25.12

A Test of National Honor

Hal G.P. Colebatch | 5.25.12

How About the Record of DOE Capital?

William Tucker | 5.25.12

The Great Debate

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. | 5.24.12

ADVERTISEMENT