Obama campaigned as a pragmatic centrist who would focus on the economy ["President Obama's Dangerous Game of Politics," usnews.com]. In his first year he has governed far to the left of where he campaigned on economic issues and has lost independents and reenergized the right. In my opinion, Obama is a pragmatic deal-maker and the primary problem is he's been pulled too far left by radical House leadership and ideological, partisan legislation. The best thing that could happen for Obama and the country is if the Republicans took back the House in 2010. Then maybe we would have a repeat of those great Clinton/Gingrich years (from 1994 until Lewinsky) when there was true bipartisanship, and we got a lot of good centrist legislation passed that the majority of voters actually supported (a novel concept that Obama hasn't grasped yet).
Comment by John R. of MI
This piece represents exactly what many are thinking and feeling; right on target. From Obama's failure to recognize what really is important to the public (the economy), to Congress's arrogance, ineptitude and corruption of the political process, to the real concern over the cost of healthcare, to the need for constructive deficit spending away from control of the politicians, and the impending failure of the Republicans to seize this opportunity as they remain the "Party of No." Well done, Mort. It is not too late, but it will be soon if these people we voted for continue on their current self-indulgent paths.
Comment by Frank of CA
Few on the left are willing to discuss the culpability of the government in the financial meltdown. As for Obama's aggressive agenda actually causing greater dislocation and higher unemployment, thank you so much for pointing this out. He's doing so many things, no risk manager can find a safe place to invest outside treasuries, and that's killing job creation. I may not agree with your politics, but you've identified the issues causing our current financial pain. I've never seen a president tell as many transparent lies as Obama. If Congress can't impeach him, what can voters do to mitigate the damage he's doing?
Comment by Dave C. of TX
The private sector is where wealth is created to generate tax revenue. Both parties are guilty of overspending, using credit, and choking the engine of wealth creation for the private sector, which in turn chokes off the tax revenue we need to fund our government spending. Bush was bad, so Obama was elected; he's about three times worse. The bank will break, the system will melt down because no one in our government has the discipline to stop spending. Then we will have no money for social programs, but I fear even then that people will still only argue about political parties.
Comment by Dereck Phoulson of WI
The characterization of Republicans as the "Party of No" is wrong and unfair. The Obama administration ignored Republican input on the pork [stimulus] bill and then the only major program from then on has been the misbegotten healthcare mess. Again the Republicans are right to say no to a bill that is opposed by almost 60 percent of Americans. Even now Obama is sticking to this plan and the Republicans cannot in principle support it. The Republicans have no power to enact legislation and as long as the Obama agenda is extreme they should not support it.
Comment by Pete of NY
- Check out our political cartoons.
- Become a political insider: Subscribe to U.S. News Weekly, our digital magazine.