But the smoke is beginning to clear and the mirrors are starting to crack. The public is beginning to realize they must, at their own peril, pay attention to the man behind the curtain. According to a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll:
Nearly seven in 10 survey respondents said they had concerns about federal interventions into the economy, including Mr. Obama's decision to take an ownership stake in General Motors Corp., limits on executive compensation and the prospect of more government involvement in health care. The negative feeling toward the GM rescue was reflected elsewhere in the survey as well. A solid majority — 58% — said that the president and Congress should focus on keeping the budget deficit down, even if takes longer for the economy to recover.
Obama's proposed plan to solve the so-called health care crisis also has the public scratching their heads and wondering from whence the money for the staggering trillion-plus cost will come. A New York Times/CBS News poll found only 44% of respondents approve of his healthcare initiative.
Pew Research notes that while Obama's personal popularity remains high, he is losing the confidence of the voters in his handling of the overall economy. According to Pew, his ratings on the economy have slipped from 60% in April to 52% in June.
As the revolution in Iran unfolds on the city streets of that troubled hot spot, Obama faces another crisis as well. White House statements urging caution in dealing with the Iranian situation, have been decisively repudiated by Congress, which voted 405-1 to condemn the Ahmadinejad regime's crackdown on protesters.
As Obama moves to remake America into his own private vision of a 21st century Utopia, he would do well to remember the voters. If he continues to displease them, his summer of Hope and Change may well turn into his Winter of Discontent.
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - roger nowosielski
What will the condemnation do if it can't be backed by action? Another empty gesture only revealing our impotence?
2 - Dave Nalle
As Lincoln said, you can fool some of the public all of the time and all of the public some of the time, but you can't fool all of the public all of the time.
Dave
3 - Dan(Miller)
Clav, I suspect that you may have a better response to Roger's comment, but here's mine:
To the extent that the United States is to retain (or perhaps to regain) any semblance of moral authority, it is high time for her President at least to express United States solidarity with those in Iran who are fighting and dying for some of the freedoms still widely enjoyed in the United States. To the extent that this requires some harsh words for the rulers of Iran, so be it. To the extent that this may diminish the already nil chances of persuading those rules to abandon their ambitions for nuclear weapons or to recognize Israel as a (Jewish) state, so be it. He has voted "present" often enough. Now, it is time for him to vote "yea" or "nay."
Dan(Miller)
4 - Clavos
Dan(Miller),
As is so often the case, you've said it best.
5 - El Bicho
"The president is being roundly criticized for insufficient, rhetorical support for what's going on over there. It seems to me foolish criticism. The people on the streets know full well what the American attitude toward the regime is. And they don't need that reinforced."
- George Will
6 - Dave Nalle
George Will is usually right. The individual support shown to the Iranian people by Americans is of far more value than anything Obama can reasonably do in this situation.
Dave
7 - Cindy
Neda's death
"A young woman who was standing aside with her father watching the protests was shot by a basij member hiding on the rooftop of a civilian house. He had clear shot at the girl and could not miss her. However, he aimed straight her heart. I am a doctor, so I rushed to try to save her. But the impact of the gunshot was so fierce that the bullet had blasted inside the victim's chest, and she died in less than 2 minutes.
The protests were going on about 1 kilometers away in the main street and some of the protesting crowd were running from tear gass used among them, towards Salehi St.
The film is shot by my friend who was standing beside me. Please let the world know."
Note: The graphic photo and video are placed low on the page.
8 - Dan(Miller)
If the President of the United States doesn't feel a need, personally, to express the outrage felt in the United States toward the happenings in Iran, I guess he should just go get another ice cream cone. Every little bit of stimulus helps.
Dan(Miller)
9 - Heloise
Your metaphors are improving I see.
You skip unemployment numbers and skim the economy. Implicit of course is that they are knotted together. But I think that is the biggest bone of contention if there is any, with voters. They want jobs...now. The rest is laniappe (sp).
On Iran, I advised Obama to do nothing when in doubt. I don't know whose advice he is following but it sounds like the Buddha's to me.
Can't we just let other countries have the semblance of self-direction? Of turning the sails where they see fit? Mousavi has already said he is prepared to be a martyr. Should Obama endorse that too?
Leave them alone and they will come home. Come home to true democracy? I don't think so. Democracy is for the highly evolved...even we have not mastered it.
As for health care: I've started writing about that too. I call it shaken doctor syndrome and medical fault lines because the "whys" of its opposition are underground.
We can keep up the pretense that this is the best health care system in the world, but for whom? I worked in it for 10 long years and it's all about the doctors and growing bigger medical centers. I live in a hospital district and Childrens, Baylor and Harris are building like there is no tomorrow. Who or what's going to pay for that? Are they expecting a money bloom?
A well-run charity hospital in every large community actually would do nicely. But many in CA were closed when the illegals over-used them. Like I said, the true reasons behind the health care debacle are underground.
Heloise
10 - Clavos
@ 5 and 6:
Far be it from me to argue with the wisdom of George Will, whom I greatly admire, and his point as quoted by El Bicho is cogent, as far as it goes.
However, vis-a-vis the thesis of the article: Obama's slippage in the polls, it would behoove him, in terms of his standing with Americans to come out with a statement more congruent with that of Congress.
11 - Dan(Miller)
Here is some more nonsense on Iran, which apparently is not of much concern to Our President. He should just continue to play it safe and hope for the best, whatever he may think that is.
In the meantime, there are lots of more important things.
Dan(Miller)
12 - Clavos
More on the dwindling public support for his health plan from Politico:
Public anxiety about red ink â€" muted during this winter’s debate over an economic stimulus package â€" has come roaring back, with a Gallup Poll showing deficits and spending as the only issues where more people disapprove of Obama’s performance than approve of it.
13 - Cindy
George Will could suck my d--k. (you know, theoretically...) Still I'll go along with that and with El B, and with Dave and with Heloise ('cept I take exception to that bit about being ready for democracy)
Hands Off The People Of Iran
"Hands Off The People Of Iran fights against the threat of any imperialist intervention, war or sanctions against Iran. It looks to build active, practical solidarity with grass-roots radical secular forces in Iran, the militant women’s, workers and students movements. We want regime change, both in Iran and in the imperialist countries. But we know that change must come from below - from the struggles of the working class and social movements - if it is to lead to genuine liberation."
News from the struggles in Iran
The above are two sites I highly recommend.
14 - roger nowosielski
You know, Dan, #3 is really pathetic. Not the form of words, of course - who can disagree with that and the idea of moral leadership, but the timing.
It's the height of irony that conservatives such as yourself talk of moral authority and its proper use only in situations when it's in no position of being exercised. Where where you and all your cohorts when US invaded Iraq for much less legitimate reasons than our interference with Iran would now warrant? And don't tell me now that Saddam Hussein's inhumanity was the main reason for our so doing, or that he trampled on human rights and other such nonsense. These may have used as pretexts and after the fact rationalizations for our actions and continuous presence, but surely not the main reasons - in spite of Bush & Co high claims of spreading freedom and democracy throughout the world and nation-building.
It's really amazing how you fail to see how your insistence on human rights - precisely in situations when there's very little that we can do about - sound hollow and shallow, indeed, fucking buffoonish.
We created Iran the enemy - Iran which had its own ambitions of being a major player in the Middle East, by building up Iraq. Iran the enemy is, in no small part, the result of our own creation. Indeed, even the Iranian Revolution was in a sense prompted by Shah's brutal regime, marked also by violations of human rights - but in that case against the Islamists. And we supported that regime wholeheartedly. So missed in all this is how the conservatives tend to view morals and insist on morality in human actions only through the prism of what they deem as best in America's national interests.
It's for this very reason that I am very highly suspect of this present outrage on your part, and those who share your view - precisely because we're been rendered impotent to act by virtue of failed policies in the past. And all I see in that is just another way to criticize and undermine the present administration - which makes it, once more, just another instance of and exercise in extreme partisanship.
I'm sorry, but for the reasons stated, I can't take this outrage and complaint seriously.
15 - Cindy
And we supported that regime wholeheartedly. (a little adjustment)
The 1953 Iranian coup d’état deposed the democratically-elected government of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mosaddeq.
The UK and the US wanted Iran's oil profits. So, they subjected the people of Iran to an U.S. allied dictator. The spreaders of 'democracy' ride again. Yay for the 'good guys'!
(1979--How could those Iranians be so hateful to take American hostages?1)they hate 'our' freedom? 2)religious fundamentalist thinking?))
Fast Forward to 2025: (Why do those Afghans and Iraqis hate the U.S so much?--1)they hate 'our' freedom? 2)religious fundamentalist thinking?)
16 - Cindy
LIFE reports that the Iranian photographer who took these pictures, Eyewitness from Tehran's Streets is missing.
17 - roger nowosielski
#15 Well taken. Add that to the list of US hypocrisies.
18 - Bliffle
Who, here at BC, really knows anything about the Iranian contenders?
Is Mousavi really the 'Human Rights' candidate that some imagine? Or is he just someone else that we hope turns out better than the current guy?
I heard a disturbing report from an Iranian in the USA who said that Mousavi is no saviour. That he has previously been responsible for executions.
How can anyone, here on BC, know whether the election was rigged?
How can anyone, here on BC, know whether the demonstrations are sincere or rigged?
How can we know accurately what the desires of the people of Iran are?
SHouldn't we have overwhelming evidence of the illegitimacy of the Iran government before we shoot our mouths off, let alone start making threats?
Have we learned nothing from the Iraq fiasco?
19 - Robert M. Barga
@18
that, my friend, is the whole point of my articles
20 - Clavos
They're killing each other off. Who cares?
21 - Dan(Miller)
Roger, you say It's the height of irony that conservatives such as yourself talk of moral authority and its proper use only in situations when it's in no position of being exercised.
There is an opportunity to exercise moral authority. President Obama is thought to have a way with words. Even if he only uses words, that would be useful. Up to now, he has essentially left the folks in Iran who seem to want some small smattering of human rights to twist slowly in the wind. He can do better than that.
As to having given up the right, as a conservative, to talk about moral authority, I think you are mistaken. However,I don't see any useful purpose likely to be served by further belaboring the point.
Dan(Miller)
22 - roger nowosielski
Dan,
Words aren't enough in situations like that. And so is the case with "moral authority" as though it would carry any weight. Moral authority has to be earned. And by its many past actions and policies, we've squandered it.
I don't disagree with you in that what we're seeing in Iran is a most deplorable situation, only that there isn't really all that much that we can do about it. And shooting out mouths off without there being any backup plane to do something about it is an exercise in futility, only further exposing our impotence and weakness.
23 - STM
Now is the winter of our discount tents
24 - Dan(Miller)
Roger,
My recollections may be clouded by time (or something else) but I seem to recall that "mere words" were used by the U.S. Government just before East Germany "tore down that wall." Similarly, I seem to recall that "mere words" were used by the U.S. Government just before the Communist Polish Government fell. If I recall incorrectly, perhaps you will be kind enough to correct me.
If "mere words" are useless in the present context, how are such trivial gestures going to help to persuade Iran not to continue to develop a nuclear arsenal, not to nuke Israel, and generally to be nice? Or do we no longer care about that sort of thing?
This is probably the first opportunity the United States has had in many years to show her spunk in defending freedom and human rights, and the first time when large numbers of U.S. citizens seem to favor that sort of thing. "Mere words" may not be enough; then again, they may help the already large masses of Iranians to think that even the much disparaged United States look at their situation with sadness.
Here, for such interest if any as it may hold, is a letter which may (or may not) have been written or approved by Mr. Mousavi.
Dan(Miller)
25 - Jordan Richardson
Is Mousavi really the 'Human Rights' candidate that some imagine? Or is he just someone else that we hope turns out better than the current guy?
No way. He's no Human Rights candidate. Anyone who says that is out to lunch. He's only slightly better than the current guy on foreign policy, but even that can be sketchy because it really doesn't matter what he believes. It's all about the Supreme Leader, baby.