Obama Doubt

Are you a sufferer? I’m not talking about “I Told You So” – an entirely different disorder. Did you vote for Obama and now question your choice?

It’s true that the President has made some serious errors in judgment. Health care reform is a good idea, but it’s a meal he should have served in courses. Closing Gitmo sounded good, but is it going to come back to bite us – indeed, has it bitten us already? You can add your own items to the list. And there’s the overarching question: Is he doing what he was elected to do?

I’m a Republican, and many of the things John McCain was saying in 2008 and continues to say today make sense – so much sense that Mr. Obama himself is saying some of them. I would have voted for McCain, were it not for the Big One in the errors-in-judgment department: Sarah Palin.

As far as I’m concerned, the selection of Palin as the VP candidate -- a potential spare President – represented a security risk of the first magnitude. Could anyone seriously conceive of a person with that level of ignorance about the world sitting in the Oval Office? McCain either actively supported this choice or went along with the campaign staffers who came up with it – some of whom are now admitting their mistake. That was a fatal error for me, and I voted Democrat.

Obama’s clearly in a lot of trouble. He may indeed be a one-termer. Is he damaged goods for the rest of that term? As I said in yesterday’s post, it’s only the end of the first quarter of this game, and attention spans are no longer what they used to be – and they were never long to begin with. Many of the presidents whom a majority revere today – FDR, JFK, Reagan and Lincoln, for example – had widely varying degrees of popularity during their tenure. And few were elected with the enormously favorable margins that Richard Nixon enjoyed to begin his second term.

So yes, I’m suffering from Obama Doubt. At the moment, it’s not terminal -- but check back with me later.

The Game Isn't Changed

President Obama’s State of the Union speech was a great speech, but no game-changer. But how many games do you remember a State of the Union speech changing, anyway?

Personally, I’m a little tired of the media hanging the President’s whole future on a speech. You know the thinking: “If he doesn’t hit out of the park this time….”

I didn’t hear much that surprised me. He did convince me that he “gets it” as far as the average voter’s real priorities are concerned: jobs, tax cuts for small business, etc. Health care wasn’t even brought up until halfway through the address. I think health care -- or at least health insurance reform – remains a major issue and of critical importance to the average American family. It’s just that we’re all tired of hearing about it. Republicans and Democrats agree on most of what needs to be fixed. So let’s tell ‘em to fix it!

Quite frankly, the only thing that really surprised me in the speech was that the word “nuclear” came out of Obama’s mouth without him choking on it.

None of us doubts the ability of this President to deliver a great speech. But a speech can’t really change the game, because the teams’ field positions are exactly where they were before Mr. Obama uttered word one. This is only the end of the first quarter. It’s all about where we go from here.

The Haiti Laboratory

The 7-point Haiti earthquake, as I said in an earlier post, is a clear candidate for the greatest tragedy of the century, which admittedly is still young. But at the risk of sounding cold, it’s a critical learning opportunity.

At some point we have to set emotions aside and look upon Haiti as a sociopolitical laboratory, if we can use that term, albeit an unwanted one What questions does it raise, and what answers will it provide, about human behavior in such circumstances?

Of course, all these situations have unique elements: Haiti is not California, nor central China, nor New Orleans, but since human beings are involved, there are common elements. This was a major earthquake that hit a population center – something that really doesn’t happen that often – so we need to pay attention to the questions.

Do we need to revise our estimates of how long human beings can survive after being buried under rubble? What causes them to survive so long – is it faith, temperament or genetics?

The stories of courageous family members digging out their relatives against all odds are heartwarming, but how is the great mass of the population behaving in unbelievably extreme circumstances? Is there any reason to believe people in more “civilized” places would behave any better? How do you think you’d behave after a week without water?

What role does communication play in affecting human behavior -- online, satellite and conventional (“old-fashioned,” if you prefer) methods?

There’s a lot of Monday-morning quarterbacking in play here, revolving around the issues of planning and security. One camp says you have to assess the situation first in order to apply help most effectively, ensuring the security of those providing the help. The other says, jump in and help those you can, and when the victims see that they’re getting help quickly, security will take care of itself. So who’s right?

Retired Gen. Russel Honore, who was military commander in the Katrina hurricane response and now a CNN consultant, is in the second camp. He said early on that able-bodied Haitians should be recruited to clear landing sites for helicopters around Port-au-Prince, to get around the blocked-roads problem. Was that done, or was that idea even feasible?

Who can manage these situations most effectively? Does there need to be a “czar” to run things – civilian or military?

In Haiti’s case, why did it take more than a week to figure out that victims in outlying cities also need help? Did Katrina teach us nothing?

Rebuilding Port-au-Prince will probably take decades, and some may be wondering, is it worth it?

George Clooney’s telethon took over most of the networks in the U.S. Friday as well as others around the world. It likely had much better pickup than the State of the Union message will get on Wednesday. The big question, of course, is what happens with the ADD-afflicted audience in, say, six months or a year from now.

The big overarching question is – are we really going to take what we learn from Haiti and apply it to the next disaster?

I Won't Hold It Against Him

I think a Republican victory in Massachusetts on Tuesday would be a good thing. If it happens, it will be a clear sign that the health care bill belongs in the circular file or the wood chipper.

I haven’t read this bill (as I’m sure most members of Congress haven’t). But from what’s been reported from many different sides, it’s a mess. There are things it does nothing about, like wellness, tort reform and drug prices. The problems that are addressed aren’t dealt with for several years.

Many will consider a GOP win this week a black eye for President Obama, but I won’t hold it against him if it comes to pass. He should be given a lot of credit for shining the spotlight on the need for health care reform. We all would agree it’s a job worth doing, and if so, it’s worth doing right. It’s very hard to scuttle a ship that’s been so long in the building, but let’s face it, this one just doesn’t float – and frankly, I would have just as much respect for the President let this one sink. Nobody is getting ahead with this bill except the special interests.

So will a Republican win inTed Kennedy’s home state presage a sweep for that party in the mid-term elections? Not necessarily. If you’re running for Congress –especially if you think this bill is a bad idea – you have an obligation to come up with something better. The health care debate has given us all a great education in how Congress works – and a yearning for a better way to make sausages.

A Nation That Needs Building

While only 10 percent of this century is in the books, January 12, 2010 will surely be remembered for one of its worst natural disasters, anywhere on the globe.

While one American religious figure (who needs no publicity here) has called the Haiti earthquake God’s payback for revolution and/or voodoo, it could be argued that this is God’s two-by-four aimed at waking the world up to a country that needs attention – but this presupposes that you believe that God is involved at all, a whole different discussion.

While the U.S. is busy with nation-building halfway around the world – supposedly in the interests of national defense -- Haiti is a nation that needs building right now. And it’s only 700 miles away.

Haiti is a poster child for “failed states.” Its government was incapable of responding to Tuesday’s cataclysm in the most basic of ways (indeed, the government itself is a victim). Haiti is one of the first independent countries in our hemisphere, but in 200 years – basically since the last big earthquake there – no one has really shown its people how to do things. It needs that kind of help, and in contrast to the countries we’re involved in on the other side of the world, I believe Haiti would welcome it.

A right-wing talk-show host (again, someone who needs no publicity here) has suggested that the Obama administration will use the Haiti disaster to burnish its image and boost its approval rating. I submit that there’s plenty of time later to judge motives for helping Haiti, but there’s no time now for such things. After seeing the images conveyed on TV and through social networks, who can even think of ulterior motives right now? We just have to help, in any way that’s available, as fellow citizens of Earth.

Name of the Game

In Yemen, there are a surprising number of fans of a popular English sport -- but they play by a different set of rules. It's called, of course...uh...Yemeni Cricket.