Today, President Obama arrived in Canada for his first foreign trip since Inauguration. It’s noteworthy, though, to look at where he’s traveled in the United States before heading north of the border.
Last week, the president was in Florida; this week, he showed up in Colorado and Arizona. There were ostensible reasons for all these stops: Florida has been hard-hit by the foreclosure crisis, and has a governor–Charlie Crist–who has been an outspoken supporter of Obama’s “stimulus” plan; Colorado is where Obama accepted the Democratic nomination, and was cited by the press as being far from the partisan atmosphere of Washington; and Arizona, like Florida, has also been hard-hit by the foreclosure crisis.
Fair enough, but let’s also be clear that all of these states are also presidential-election swing states, or potentially so.
Hillary Clinton is off on her first trip overseas as Secretary of State, to Asia. Her explanation for making Japan, Indonesia, South Korea, and China the targets of her first diplomatic foray was that “America’s relationships across the Pacific are indispensable to addressing the challenges and seizing the opportunities of the 21st century”…but it was hard not to be reminded of last week’s column in TheHill.com by Dick Morris, former adviser to President Bill Clinton and subsequent critic of both the Clintons. With that piece in mind, one wonders whether the reason Hillary is in Asia is: It’s not Europe, where Vice President Joe Biden has already represented the United States in Europe at the Munich Security Conference; it’s not the Middle East, where George Mitchell is President Obama’s special envoy; and it’s not Afghanistan or Pakistan, now the bailiwick of Ambassador Richard Holbrooke, also a special envoy.If the parsing of Clinton’s role in the Obama administration seems hasty, less than a month after inauguration–well, it is. But be prepared for this to be a matter of interest to pundits and pols along the Northeast corridor. Out in the larger world, Obama faces a host of diplomatic challenges, and the roster of A-level talent representing the U.S. abroad may be the best way to do it (we’ll see). It might be worth reading how a German commentator contextualizes both the political and the foreign-policy implications of Secretary Clinton’s first trip, as he pulls out for what we in television call the wide shot.
It’s interesting to see what gets emphasized when people read a book. Take, for example, Hide and Seek: The Search for Truth in Iraq by Charles Duelfer, author of the Iraq Survey Group’s 2004 “Deulfer Report”Here’s how amazon.com describes the book:
“Hide and Seek is his account—based on unparalleled access to Iraqi leadership, the White House, and the CIA—of the long and tragic unraveling of the U.S. relationship with Iraq. This book sees beyond the propaganda and deceits of both sides to tell the story of the miscalculations in assessing Iraq as a threat, why Saddam responded as he did to U.S. demands, and precisely how the U.S. implemented its decision to topple Saddam’s regime. No one is better able than Duelfer to see inside the mindsets of the two administrations, with their mismatched priorities, wounded pride, and dangerous ability to bluff and counterbluff.”
Run a Google “news” search on the book’s title, though, and the first of two results you’ll get back is this U.S. News and World Report blog, concerning Duelfer’s speculation, regarding my 2003 pre-war interview with Saddam Hussein, that by rehearsing for the interview in front of the mirror in a hotel room that was likely bugged I had probably tipped my questions to the Iraqi dictator.Sorry, but this is like saying a basketball coach can figure out an opposing team’s strategy by watching how its players line up for pre-game layups. In a case such as this, I work under the assumption that my quarters are bugged…so what I was checking in front of the mirror was not the content of my questions, but rather my demeanor in asking them. That’s why I used a mirror, something that would have been unnecessary if I had been simply reviewing the specific questions out loud.
Had Duelfer asked me about this, I would have told him. But then U.S. News and World Report would have had to write about the more trivial aspects of the book. Like how the U.S. got involved in a hugely expensive war—measured in lives, dollars, world standing, and lost opportunities—to find weapons of mass destruction that didn’t exist.
File today’s developments under the heading “In politics, overnight is a long time, and a week is forever.” Earlier this week, the young Obama presidency suffered its worst day, with the withdrawals of Nancy Killefer and Tom Daschle coming within hours of one another (and stepping all over Obama’s latest nod to bipartisanship in tapping Senator Judd Gregg [R-NH] to head Commerce), Senate Republicans blocking a Democratic attempt to add $25 billion in infrastructure spending to the so-called stimulus bill, and Senate Democratic leaders conceding that they didn’t have the votes to pass the measure.
Some further thoughts on the unanimous “No” vote that House Republicans gave the Obama/Pelosi bill aimed stimulating the economy—predicated on the idea that, when you see an entire party caucus of 178 Representatives vote as one, chances are you’re looking at the result of a coordinated strategy. Or, as Bill Clinton used to say, “if you see a turtle sitting on a fence post, it didn’t get there by accident.”
Along with the headline that the Obama/Pelosi so-called stimulus bill passed the House today, comes the subhead that the bill passed without a single Republican vote. That’s impressive party discipline, particularly in light of Obama’s highly visible nods to bipartisanship on the Hill (in the form of his meeting with House Republicans, at the Capitol rather than the White House) and in the bill (in the form of including tax cuts that most left-of-center economists agree will do little-to-nothing to stimulate the economy).
Total party discipline is unusual on any vote, at any time. To see it in the wake of the Democrats’ victories this past Election Day, at a time when the sense of crisis is palpable and the new president’s approval rating is still sky high, is noteworthy. The GOP, in the House, at least, has served notice that it will fully embrace its role as the loyal opposition, with what is—at least at the outset—surprising unanimity.
Hi folks—I’m going to be sharing some thoughts here as they occur on President Obama’s first 100 days and beyond, and we start with one for the “What Were They Thinking?” file: Could someone explain to me just why Treasury Secretary-designate Timothy Geithner—and, by extension, the Obama administration—thinks now is a good time to explicitly call out China for “manipulating” its currency?
A hunch, and only a hunch: The President-elect may announce his choice for new Secretary of the Treasury before Sunday. This is based on a belief that the worldwide financial community is holding its breath about the choice and hoping for a quick announcement, and that Mr. Obama will want to dominate the Sunday papers, Sunday morning talk-shows and the Internet with something new and decisive regarding the economy. Just a hunch. We”ll see.
Bob Rubin and Larry Summers, each a Treasury Secretary in the Clinton years, have been working with Senator Obama for some time on possible early decisions about the economy, including filling the Treasury Secretary post in a new administration (for which Summers has received prominent mention as a candidate).
“Change” was the mantra and principal byword of Senator Obama”s campaign, and change there will be—lots of it. But “caution” is the companion word to keep in mind now, because there will also be plenty of that.
The President-elect’s history has been marked by boldness when boldness is called for but also by careful, thorough preparation and a cautious approach to decision-making when that is called for—which is more often. His has not been a “shoot-from-the-hip” approach. It has been one of doing “due diligence” and thinking things through before moving forward in measured steps.
Think “change,” yes. But also think “caution.”
