Is Obama a Leader or Not?

One an can't be an expert at everything. There's domestic issues, there's military issues, there's a gazillion issues. If you're not an expert at something, should you try to lead it, or should you tell specifically hired minions - who are supposed to be experts at these things - to make their suggestions, and then you as leader choose the one you're going to do.

I've often wondered if we shouldn't have two presidents...or maybe put the vice president in charge of something larger than making speeches. We need someone to deal only with domestic matters, and we need someone to deal only with international matters. Of course, the "main" guy would make the ultimate decision - for example to press the red button.

In any event, Rush shared the press conference from yesterday, in which Carney stated that Obama was not going to be a leader in the job production effort:

So the question is, "When the president puts forward his plan or his set of ideas, does he envision that as his idea for what the final compromise should look like, or is this sort of an opening offer?"

CARNEY: I don't want to get too far ahead of the process. Obviously, the committee is the acting body here and will, hopefully, come up with a proposal that emerges from the committee and then is -- then moves on that fast track to be voted on up or down by Congress. He will be contributing to that process, not driving it or directing it.

RUSH: So they canceled Carney today, and this is why. Carney said: No, the president, he not gonna be leading anything; he not gonna be driving anything. He's not gonna be directing it. So after Carney says that Obama is gonna be contributing but want directing it, Glenn Thrush of The Politico and Carney have this little back-and-forth.

THRUSH: One other thing you said that struck me as particularly interesting --

CARNEY: I try.

THRUSH: -- he will be "contributing to the process," talking about the super committee, but he won't be, uh, leading it. Why? He's the leader of the free world. Why isn't he leading this process?

CARNEY: I -- I -- I think that was a technical recognition of the fact that it is a congressional committee. Look, this president, his leadership on these issues is quite established.

RUSH: No, it's not. So the media -- Politico, the stenographers -- are not happy. (crying) "Why isn't he gonna lead? Why isn't Obama being the guy we thought he was, Jay? (crying) We thought Obama was a messiah! (sniffing) We told everybody Obama -- now he's a coward, and won't even lead? He won't even...? Why?" Carney says, "Well, the president his leadership on this issue is quite established." No, it's not. During the same press briefing Norah O'Donnell, who moved over to CBS, said, "To follow on the President saying 'I intend to release my own recommendations,' when will he do that? How is he gonna do it differently this time, or is it gonna be different?"

CARNEY: We do not control all levers of government. Sometimes that is quite unfortunate, but the fact is we work with Congress in this process, and the President will put forward his ideas.

Rush's take:

RUSH: He's basically saying the President doesn't matter here. This is Congress' baby and President's gonna put forth his ideas but that's about it. The Drive-Bys who sat there and told us that this guy was The Messiah, I think they're genuinely disappointed, genuinely surprised. These people... You know, there's a piece in the Wall Street Journal today, "Is Obama Smart?" Fascinating subject. I think we need to redefine smart in this country. There are a lot of genuinely not-very-bright people who are thought of as very intelligent. I think Obama is one of them. Obama is clearly is one of these kids who's like a lot of kids in America today.

He grew up hearing, "You're special, Barack! You're special, Little Johnny. If you think 2 + 2 = 5, that's very good, Little Johnny. It does until you figure out differently. You're wonderful winning, Little Johnny." These kids grow up and they think world resolves around them and that they're flawless and that they're perfect, and they end up not knowing anything, and they think very highly of themselves with no evidence, no reason to. They haven't accomplished anything. Obama, these people told us, these people the media who I also don't think -- and I mean this in a strictly non-insulting way. People are going to think I'm being insulting, but I'm not. I don't think they're very bright.

These questions, "Well, when is he going to lead? Why...? How will it be any different? When will the president push forward his idea?" Uh, have they not sobered this guy the last two and a half years? In fact, you know there's even a leftist columnist who's saying, "You know, Obama is not really the New Deal guy. Obama is not really the leftist here. Obama's not really that far. He just turned everything over to Pelosi and now he's paying the price." There's actually a lib columnist or somebody put that out. "Obama's not the liberal here. He just turned everything over to Pelosi, now he's paying the price," and the sad fact is bright people don't go into journalism. It's just that simple.

______________
My Schedule of Regular Posts:
*Monday through Friday morning - schedules of President, VP and Secretary of State and her diplomats
*Monday through Friday afternoon - List of topics Limbaugh discussed on his program that day
*Monday through Friday throughout the day - My posts on anything that I feel like talking about. At least one or two a day, sometimes more.
*Saturday through Sunday morning - An addition to my booklist of political books - covering Democrats, Republicans and other interested parties.