Are You Better Off Now Than Eight Years Before?

Obama’s Democrats in the U.S. Senate are down to only 59 to the Republicans 41 and therefore can’t vote for cloture on any party-line vote in order to cut off debate so that legislation can be brought to a vote.

I am not quite sure I understand the logic. Apparently the Obama White House feels that the American public will side with the Republicans as they strive to stonewall the Democrats and bring the Senate to a standstill on anything substantive in Obama's proposed legislative package based on the campaign promises that got him elected.

Further, Obama seems to accept the notion that the American public (electorate) is tired of the wrangling and delays and therefore does not want any of the legislation passed that was the basis of Obama’s victory to address the economic, military, medical, and employment mess left by the Bush II administration.

Apparently, conventional wisdom by White House strategists is that the American public supports Republican efforts to continue the past year stalemate another three years, and then to elect a Republican to extend Republican policies that put us where we are now.

Ronald Reagan, tagged as the “great communicator” had a knack for taking an idea and presenting it in an overly simplified format to a receptive American public. One classic example was offered during the 1980 Carter – Reagan presidential campaign. Reagan simply asked Americans: are you better off now than you were four years ago.

I question why Reagan’s question wasn’t adapted to the 2008 election continuously whether Americans were better off after eight years of Bush II . While the public was pre-occupied with whether to impeach Clinton along party lines for whether or not he lied about sexual dalliances, his administration also became the first administration since the Great Depression and World War II to balance the budget. Thus giving Bush II the opportunity to give two tax rebates to the American public and launch not one, but two wars.

Now we find ourselves in record debt and barely avoided the recession spiraling into another depression. Bank loans and employment became priorities while having to forego addressing our indebtedness.

Now the public seems to have forgotten already: 1) who got us into this mess, 2) how close we came to being drawn into a major depression, 3) how many Americans are in extreme need of employment and/or medical coverage, 4) who is the one that is effectively confronting these problems, and 5) how problems of such magnitude cannot be contained easily or quickly.

With that as a basis, I wonder why the American public is allowing itself the excessive luxury of becoming intolerant and impatient of the current administration, and why the Democrats are allowing Republicans to frame the question in such negative terms.

It is beyond me as to why Democrats do not constantly ask if we are better eight years after Bush II took over, if we are better off or worse off in the one year that the Obama administration has been in power. And correspondingly, how Republican stonewalling is in the best interest of the American public and/or solving the problems that confront us. At what point does the needs of the country take priority over what is politically expedient for partisan gamesmanship?

Can we really afford the luxury of another three-year stalemate that leaves these threatening challenges unmet? Why isn’t the American public screaming bloody murder at the party responsible for creating the problems and now stonewalling any attempts to try to recover from them?