Is a Major Obama Administration Shake-Up Coming?
It was Obama who used his first meeting with Republicans to sound a bipartisan note: "I won."
It was Obama who said of the difference between now and previous attempts to pass major Democratic-backed legislation: "You have me."
It was Obama who said of the beer summit police officer that he "acted stupidly."
It was Obama who called on Hispanics to "punish their enemies."
It was Obama who appointed a Truther and Communist, Van Jones, to be "green czar." And Mao-loving Anita Dunn to his Comms shop. And took the advice of socialists like Peter Dreier, Jeremiah Wright, and yes, Bill Ayers.
It was Obama who put a tax cheat atop Treasury, and it was Obama who outsourced his largest policy initiatives to the strident Reid and and the shrill Pelosi. And it was Obama who broke his own promise to post legislation days before votes, so the public could read them first.
It was Obama who said Republicans may get more votes but will still have to "sit in the back." Presumably with the voters who empowered them. Who are his "enemies" (see above).
It was Obama who created the "bitter clingers" as a voting bloc.
I do expect that come Wednesday, during his 1 pm press conference, President Obama will announce some personnel shifts. He'll announce his offer to work with the Republicans, by which he'll actually mean that they will have to come his way or he will continue to dishonestly denounce them. He may publicly fire someone. Maybe Gibbs gets to spend some more time with his family.
Obama's greatest problem, though, is that no matter who else he fires, he still has himself.
The Obama administration's greatest and most intractable problem is Obama. No Beltway shake-up will fix that.
More: Mickey Kaus says we should cut Obama some slack over the "enemies" line, because:
Isn't it clear that Obama's now-controversial "enemies" remark was simply a rephrasing of union leader Samuel Gompers famous dictum that labor should "reward its friends and punish its enemies"? Standard union (and political scientist) talk.
That's actually a confirmation of the problem with how Obama thinks and how that translates into how he governs. He's a creature of, by and for the unions -- they're in his head in the worst way. The unions outlived their utility probably 40 years ago, and are now largely just corrupt pools of retrograde socialism and outright thuggery. That their thinking is in Obama's DNA to the level that he reflexively uses their terminology tells us that, first, "hope and change" really was a conscious fraud on his part and that, second, he only recognizes how problematic his union-think is when it blows up in his face. And then, he only sees it as a communications problem, not a worldview problem. Neither recommends him as unifier, or even as someone who grasps the modern economy at all.