Copyright © 2010 Ed Bagley
Dick Morris and his frequent appearances on Bill O'Reilly's top-rated FOX News program have been a thorn in the side of President Obama and the Democratic Party's majority members in Congress.
Morris never misses a chance to point out what he perceives as any Obama misstep, or the majority party's failure to get issued-oriented legislation passed. Here is an example following the President's recent State of the Union Address (1-27-10):
"Any president, at any time, can choose to embody the consensus his nation has reached after it has engaged in a period of extended debate," said Morris. "That process, called triangulation, involves the embrace of the elements advanced by the right and by the left that Americans have found valid, and the rejection of those from which they have turned away.
"When our nation encounters a new problem, we welcome vigorous debate and encourage each side to articulate its views and elaborate its solutions.
"But, after a time," continues Morris, "we have heard enough and want resolution, consensus and implementation. If Obama heeds that call, he can, indeed, turn his Presidency around. But if he continues to pursue his leftist, socialist agenda and uses a feigned moderation as a guise for his radicalism, we will not be fooled again. We have been down that road with him before."
Morris offers as an example the current healthcare proposal that a majority of Americans have rejected because they do not want to nationalize our healthcare system, suffer cuts in the Medicare benefits for seniors who have paid into the system for years, require businesses to have mandatory insurance coverage or pay a penalty, and reduce the pay for physicians who provide the actual services.
But will Democratic members of Congress—with President Obama's blessing—actually negotiate with the opposition after literally locking Republicans out of the process, holding closed-door meetings with outside stakeholders, cutting secret deals with stakeholders, and getting embarrassed in the process? Morris does not think so.
"But will Obama do it?" questions Morris. "Will he emulate Clinton and save his presidency by moving to the center? Certainly not before he has lost his control over Congress. It was not the defeat of healthcare that impelled Clinton's change of course, but his defeat in the elections of 1994. Even then, it took six months to turn the battleship around.
"And after he loses Congress? Probably not even then. Clinton was a lifelong moderate who moved to the left when expediency dictated. Obama is a lifelong liberal who pretends to move to the center when he has to. A committed socialist, one doubts that Obama would sacrifice his cherished transformative goals for incremental policies."
Morris points out that "there is a basic difference between the circumstances that surround the Obama and Clinton administrations. Clinton faced relatively minor problems while Obama is neck deep in recession, deficit and stagnation. Clinton could reshape his presidency by positioning, posturing and passing moderate legislation. But Obama can only succeed by altering outcomes. Americans want jobs, lower unemployment, economic growth, a reduced deficit and an end to the recession."
Morris does not cut anyone slack. "Just as George W. Bush could not recapture his popularity with new programs for Iraq—voters demanded a reduction in casualties and then withdrawal—Obama cannot save his (popularity) by announcing new ideas," says Morris. "He has to produce. All the spin in the world will not save Obama."
Morris says the voters will not tolerate much more Obama rhetoric, they demand results. My view is that the voters, even the independent voters who were vital in electing Obama, do not want government control and management of the healthcare industry, and do not want more government expansion of any kind controlling our lives.
They want Congress and the government to do a better job of regulating and controlling the institutions we already have in place to serve our needs.
I listen to and watch Dick Morris a lot because the only other political commentator I know who is as savvy and accurate as Morris about what is really going on is Charles Krauthammer. New York Times columnist David Brooks has called Charles Krauthammer "the most important conservative columnist" in the nation today.
FOX News may be fair and balanced, but the network is also conservative in every important issue of debate. That said, the other major networks (MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN and PBS) are over-the-top liberal. They frequently fail to report news that does not ideologically suit them, or that they feel will hurt the political figures and beliefs they support, which is why there are so many liberal political commentators with mediocre minds.
In the main, the liberals sound to me like a bunch of confused and partisan commentators with little thought power compared to Krauthammer, who comes across as rational, logical and brilliant with a real intellect. Krauthammer can actually deliver compound, complex sentences on cue that explain a situation, provide brilliant insight, and make coherent sense at the same time.
This is why I will listen to everyone, but I am real careful about whom I believe gives valuable information. Until someone can outperform and out-predict Morris and Krauthammer, they remain among my most favored and trusted political commentators to best describe a current political situation.
Dick Morris and his frequent appearances on Bill O'Reilly's top-rated FOX News program have been a thorn in the side of President Obama and the Democratic Party's majority members in Congress.
Morris never misses a chance to point out what he perceives as any Obama misstep, or the majority party's failure to get issued-oriented legislation passed. Here is an example following the President's recent State of the Union Address (1-27-10):
"Any president, at any time, can choose to embody the consensus his nation has reached after it has engaged in a period of extended debate," said Morris. "That process, called triangulation, involves the embrace of the elements advanced by the right and by the left that Americans have found valid, and the rejection of those from which they have turned away.
"When our nation encounters a new problem, we welcome vigorous debate and encourage each side to articulate its views and elaborate its solutions.
"But, after a time," continues Morris, "we have heard enough and want resolution, consensus and implementation. If Obama heeds that call, he can, indeed, turn his Presidency around. But if he continues to pursue his leftist, socialist agenda and uses a feigned moderation as a guise for his radicalism, we will not be fooled again. We have been down that road with him before."
Morris offers as an example the current healthcare proposal that a majority of Americans have rejected because they do not want to nationalize our healthcare system, suffer cuts in the Medicare benefits for seniors who have paid into the system for years, require businesses to have mandatory insurance coverage or pay a penalty, and reduce the pay for physicians who provide the actual services.
But will Democratic members of Congress—with President Obama's blessing—actually negotiate with the opposition after literally locking Republicans out of the process, holding closed-door meetings with outside stakeholders, cutting secret deals with stakeholders, and getting embarrassed in the process? Morris does not think so.
"But will Obama do it?" questions Morris. "Will he emulate Clinton and save his presidency by moving to the center? Certainly not before he has lost his control over Congress. It was not the defeat of healthcare that impelled Clinton's change of course, but his defeat in the elections of 1994. Even then, it took six months to turn the battleship around.
"And after he loses Congress? Probably not even then. Clinton was a lifelong moderate who moved to the left when expediency dictated. Obama is a lifelong liberal who pretends to move to the center when he has to. A committed socialist, one doubts that Obama would sacrifice his cherished transformative goals for incremental policies."
Morris points out that "there is a basic difference between the circumstances that surround the Obama and Clinton administrations. Clinton faced relatively minor problems while Obama is neck deep in recession, deficit and stagnation. Clinton could reshape his presidency by positioning, posturing and passing moderate legislation. But Obama can only succeed by altering outcomes. Americans want jobs, lower unemployment, economic growth, a reduced deficit and an end to the recession."
Morris does not cut anyone slack. "Just as George W. Bush could not recapture his popularity with new programs for Iraq—voters demanded a reduction in casualties and then withdrawal—Obama cannot save his (popularity) by announcing new ideas," says Morris. "He has to produce. All the spin in the world will not save Obama."
Morris says the voters will not tolerate much more Obama rhetoric, they demand results. My view is that the voters, even the independent voters who were vital in electing Obama, do not want government control and management of the healthcare industry, and do not want more government expansion of any kind controlling our lives.
They want Congress and the government to do a better job of regulating and controlling the institutions we already have in place to serve our needs.
I listen to and watch Dick Morris a lot because the only other political commentator I know who is as savvy and accurate as Morris about what is really going on is Charles Krauthammer. New York Times columnist David Brooks has called Charles Krauthammer "the most important conservative columnist" in the nation today.
FOX News may be fair and balanced, but the network is also conservative in every important issue of debate. That said, the other major networks (MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN and PBS) are over-the-top liberal. They frequently fail to report news that does not ideologically suit them, or that they feel will hurt the political figures and beliefs they support, which is why there are so many liberal political commentators with mediocre minds.
In the main, the liberals sound to me like a bunch of confused and partisan commentators with little thought power compared to Krauthammer, who comes across as rational, logical and brilliant with a real intellect. Krauthammer can actually deliver compound, complex sentences on cue that explain a situation, provide brilliant insight, and make coherent sense at the same time.
This is why I will listen to everyone, but I am real careful about whom I believe gives valuable information. Until someone can outperform and out-predict Morris and Krauthammer, they remain among my most favored and trusted political commentators to best describe a current political situation.
SHARE
