If you are reading this article, then most likely you heard about how Barack Obama changed his stance this weekend on whether or not we should open new areas to drill for oil offshore. He now says that we should allow for some more drilling to occur if this drilling is part of a larger package of legislation that would move the United States’ energy needs toward a cleaner, greener, and more self-sufficient future.
Republicans and Democrats are both already on the attack, ready to get horizontal with Obama and start throwing punches and snarky, clever, hissy-fit accusations about his failure to stand up for what he believes in, or tell him that he’s no better than any other lying “win-at-all cost” politician, or that he has no core beliefs and is just a celebrity who goes the way that the wind (or polls) blow.
Instead of crying foul, everyone– Republicans, Independents, and Liberals (and journalists!) alike should be happy. Instead, we all have been unknowingly trained to do the most illogical thing possible: let the media make us think that when politicians change their mind (or god forbid think!), or in this case think win-win, that they should be persecuted as liars, fakes, and spineless. As Mark Halperin and John Harris so astutely explain in their book, The Way to Win: Taking the White House in 2008, most Americans have been conditioned to prefer a president that is “strong and wrong” to one that is “weak and right.” Seems like Obama should have read the book, right?
Wrong!
Is there anyone reading this article who can tell me about a legislative accomplishment passed by Congress in the past 10 years that is memorable for how terrific it has been? I sure can’t. I can only think of bills and initiatives that for some reason or another have not worked out so well, or that have been minor accomplishments.
We should want a president, whether it’s Barack Obama or John McCain, who understands that he or she isn’t going to pass some sweeping legislation that “fixes” health care, triggers a giant “boom” in environmentalism and green initiatives, makes our education system “sounder”, or produces a perfect or “ideal” resolution to the wars abroad that currently involve and do not involve the U.S. Instead, we should cheer a president who does not steer away from his or her core beliefs, but at the same time makes room to find situations that are win-win.
I’m not applauding mediocrity. I’m simply suggesting that having a president, Republican or Democrat (or better yet from a third party) who acts without a “It’s my way, or the highway” Patrick Swayze attitude might help Congress to actually pass more meaningful legislation.
Good ahead, label me a centrist and a sell-out, tell me that these kinds of compromising presidents usually fail. I’d rather see that the U.S. government accomplishes something that creates positive changes in the long-run, or passes legislation that turns out to not be so great, rather than doing nothing at all and cursing the darkness. I’m still optimistic. And Paul Krugman, if you are reading this article, your opinions on why partisanship is good are puny and resentful: not very good for making progress, buddy.
So do I personally think that drilling is a good idea? No.
But do I think drilling might help bring more possibilities in the U.S. to have wind, solar, and hydro power if drilling is allowed with them in a legislation package? Yes.
I hope it’s windy and sunny on that oil rig.
Read More About the Debate on Offshore Drilling on the Green Options Network:
Bush Lifts Executive Ban on Offshore Drilling– Why It Matters and Why It Doesn’t
Poll: Americans Don’t Think More Drilling Will Lower Gas Prices
Photo Credit: Obama ’08
I'm with you on this one, Levi. Some compromise in this area is essential to break the current deadlock on energy. We can't afford to stand still.
What we need is for the federal government to get out of everything and let the market decide whats best. How is it so great now with them in everything? It sucks. The only people doing well here are the rich because they get that fresh new money first when the federal reserve prints it up for them to use. It doesn't matter which person becomes president, we always get the same crap. Why don't they just do their job and leave us alone? The federal governments only job is to protect our liberties and freedoms and our borders. The rest should be left up to the people.
What we need is a politician that say what they mean. If they stand on a platform of change and then compromise like every other politician, that's no change that I can see. Obama's changes ("compromises", "in artful statements", etc.) are not just a person getting more data and then making a more informed decision, they are a clear example of moving to the center just to get votes. This is no different than our standard politician. Given that he stands on a platform of change, this makes his position even that much more hypocritical.
"I’m not applauding mediocrity. I’m simply suggesting that having a president, Republican or Democrat (or better yet from a third party) who acts without a “It’s my way, or the highway” Patrick Swayze attitude might help Congress to actually pass more meaningful legislation."
So if every time Democrats get elected they compromise to the right, and every time Republicans get elected they dig in refusing to budge, guess where we end up?
I have to say this is the lamest idea ever, and a great way to continue the grand Democrat tradition of caving on every fight.
I really hate all the policies that GWB has gotten enacted, but I can't argue with his success in getting many of them enacted. I attribute all the lack of progress the current congress has made to their lack of willingness to fight for what they believe in.
How well has compromise worked so far? Bill Clinton was a popular president and was willing to compromise, and where did we end up? Far to the right of where we started.