There hasn’t been a time since the second term of Franklin Roosevelt that a President has been faced with so many critical issues at once. In 1936, FDR stared down the on-going depression and the scourge of fascism, two monster problems. His eleven successors to the White House all had their challenges, but they generally came one at a time. We managed to survive all of them, although at times many felt as though Armageddon was at hand. The occupants of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue all had one thing in common: When things went wrong, they were the ones who took the blame. In some cases, Nixon and Watergate, for example, the blame was more than deserved. Others took the heat because that comes with the job description, even when Congress or others were the troublemakers.
President Obama inherited a colossal mess when he took office and he knew it. There has been no shortage of mentioning the fact that Iraq, Afghanistan, the financial meltdown, the recession, unemployment, terrorism, and health care, among other things, were inherited from previous administrations. That being said, the problems still have to be faced.
Now that the bloom is definitely off the democratic rose, everyone wants to name names and take prisoners. The President who, if nothing else, has believed that he could tackle all these troubles with a zeal that would lead to solutions, isn’t the only one who’s responsible. It is obvious that we are only marginally better off than we were on Inauguration day last year. What is not so apparent is who is at fault.
It’s human nature, when things go wrong, to look for who’s responsible; it is usually someone else. When Brett Favre ended the Vikings’ season last week, there were a couple of things he did to which one could point as the reason the Vikings will be watching the Superbowl on Feb 7th. There were many other players and coaches involved in that loss; he didn’t lose the game single-handedly although if he retires (yet again) that final interception will be the pass everyone remembers.
Most problems have multiple causes and multiple solutions which tend to increase in complexity the higher the stakes. In our current morass those things are especially true. If there were clear-cut solutions, they would have long since been implemented. It does not follow that we will be patient about assigning blame for the failure to solve horrendous problems. Instead, there will be an ever-increasing witch hunt.
This is not a trope about the President and the government in general. I’m truly grateful we have a two-party system. If you think more parties are a good thing, take a look at Italy: more than 60 different governments since World War II, some lasting less than a week. If one party was the only choice, think about the Nazi Germany and Communism. What troubles me the most is everyone’s willingness to look to someone else to accept responsibility.
The Democrats are just as culpable as the Republicans. They both suffer from the same malady: If something gets done the credit will not be shared; if there are failures, then it’s the opposition’s fault. Thus, the bipartisanship which was supposed to end has worsened to a point rarely seen in modern times. If I hear the term “reach across the aisle” one more time, my nausea may become overwhelming. It just hasn’t happened.
While both sides have legitimate complaints with the views of the other, neither is looking at the most fundamental problem: How are we going to solve these issues? We, as a people, are so quick to blame those in power if things aren’t going to suit us. The politicians know this only too well and will avoid saying anything that might jeopardize their hold on their office.
Gov. Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania recently said one of the few sensible things I have heard: Doing what is right for those who elected us . . . that’s what matters. If it costs you the next election, so be it; at least you will have done what you thought was best.
There is no such thing as a single best. Until politicians stop yelling at one another, we will end up with something that may well be the worst. When the fall elections come around, candidates will be ballyhooing their role in preserving this, that, or the other position. They will have done what they need to do to in order to win re-election.
In my view, there will have been a lot more said than done. Term limits, anyone?
By Hayden Hollingsworth [email protected]