If the article, White House Debates Fight on Economy, in The New York Times is true, then there can be no clearer indication that this President is toast.
“Playing it safe is not going to cut it,” said Ms. Romer, a professor of economics at the University of California, Berkeley. “Not proposing anything bold and not trying to do something to definitively deal with our problems would mean that we’re going to have another year and a half like the last year and a half — and then it’s awfully hard to get re-elected.”
But there is little support for such an approach inside the administration. A series of departures has left few economists among Mr. Obama’s senior advisers. Several of his political advisers are skeptical about the merits of stimulus spending, and they are certain about the politics: voters do not like it.
The very fact that the political advisers think voters do not like the only action that can get this economy going again shows the administration’s abysmal failure to even try to convince the public of what the right action is. What kind of a leader only picks policies that the electorate has been fooled by the opposition into thinking they want? If the opposition can convince the public to want the wrong policies, doesn’t Obama think he owes it to us to try to change the public’s thinking on the issue? It’s almost as if the Republicans have succeeded in bamboozling the President as well as a large part of the electorate. If Obama is not even sure of what the right policies are, we can’t expect him to be a strong voice fighting for those policies. That is why I think all is lost.
How do you define a Republican? Usually a Republican of any standing is “skeptical about the merits of stimulus spending”. Is this the person we thought we elected? Why, the very audacity of hope!!
The only hope we have left is that The New York Times is making up this story as they have done with many stories in the past. Although the most documented lies that they have told have been involved with creating excuses to go to war. Their usual technique is to use anonymous sources. In this story they appear to name names. They give names to the different people on the different sides of the debate. However, they do not claim that the named people gave them the information.
Dan Pfeiffer, the White House director of communications, said that there was no internal debate.
There is at least one named White House official that claims The New York Times story is bunk. It is rather a thin thread to hang your hopes on.
Don’t be so sure about previous Republicans ever wavering on this principle.
WikiPedia throws some doubt on the claim that Richard Nixon said, “We are all Keynesians now.”