- Joined
- May 24, 2007
- Messages
- 73,114
- Likes
- 10,947
- Points
- 113
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/08/23/obama_repeating_bush_41s_mistake.html
That predecessor was George H.W. Bush. And the mistake was that while burdened with serious unemployment problems as he faced re-election in 1992, he promised to come up with a new economic plan, not immediately, but in a few weeks. More specifically, he said in December 1991 that he would unveil his new economic blueprint in his State of the Union message in January 1992.
Sound familiar? It should. Obama, faced with more-severe economic problems than the elder Bush, now says he will outline new economic solutions in a televised speech to the nation after Labor Day, still more than two weeks away. Meanwhile, he is on vacation.
On the surface, it might appear to be a good political strategy: gear up the public for a big announcement down the road and maximize attention to it. But in practice, the strategy is fraught with dangers, as the elder Bush found to his regret.
In the period between when Bush said he would unveil a plan and the actual rollout, public expectations for a magic solution skyrocketed to heights that no plan could have reached. After all, if there was some sure-fire cure for the nation’s economic ills, wouldn’t it have been tried by then?
Nonetheless, White House aides and strategists hyped the speech. They leaked hints of what might be coming and floated trial balloons in the news media to see how they might be received. Bush’s Democratic opponents gained tons of media attention criticizing the mythical plan from every angle, even though nothing had been officially proposed.
Inevitably, Bush lost control of the narrative to his critics. So when the much-ballyhooed speech was finally delivered, it crashed of its own weight. Obama could be facing a similar fate.
Here is what James Gerstenzang wrote in the Los Angeles Times on the eve of the 1992 Bush speech. Substitute Obama’s name for Bush’s and you have a textbook case of history repeating itself.
“Facing a pivotal moment in his presidency, George Bush will deliver a State of the Union address tonight that will seek both to help restore his political stature and to convince an increasingly skeptical nation that he has a plan to end its economic trauma.
Advisers inside and outside the White House say that the President's job, beginning with tonight's nationally televised address to Congress is to demonstrate that he comprehends the pain of the recession and has a growth package to overcome it……The future of his presidency and his prospects for reelection could hang in the balance. ….The President himself has raised expectations for the speech to unusual levels, fending off questions since December about his economic recovery plan by saying that his answers would be contained in this address to the nation.”
What did Bush propose to lift the country out of recession?
That predecessor was George H.W. Bush. And the mistake was that while burdened with serious unemployment problems as he faced re-election in 1992, he promised to come up with a new economic plan, not immediately, but in a few weeks. More specifically, he said in December 1991 that he would unveil his new economic blueprint in his State of the Union message in January 1992.
Sound familiar? It should. Obama, faced with more-severe economic problems than the elder Bush, now says he will outline new economic solutions in a televised speech to the nation after Labor Day, still more than two weeks away. Meanwhile, he is on vacation.
On the surface, it might appear to be a good political strategy: gear up the public for a big announcement down the road and maximize attention to it. But in practice, the strategy is fraught with dangers, as the elder Bush found to his regret.
In the period between when Bush said he would unveil a plan and the actual rollout, public expectations for a magic solution skyrocketed to heights that no plan could have reached. After all, if there was some sure-fire cure for the nation’s economic ills, wouldn’t it have been tried by then?
Nonetheless, White House aides and strategists hyped the speech. They leaked hints of what might be coming and floated trial balloons in the news media to see how they might be received. Bush’s Democratic opponents gained tons of media attention criticizing the mythical plan from every angle, even though nothing had been officially proposed.
Inevitably, Bush lost control of the narrative to his critics. So when the much-ballyhooed speech was finally delivered, it crashed of its own weight. Obama could be facing a similar fate.
Here is what James Gerstenzang wrote in the Los Angeles Times on the eve of the 1992 Bush speech. Substitute Obama’s name for Bush’s and you have a textbook case of history repeating itself.
“Facing a pivotal moment in his presidency, George Bush will deliver a State of the Union address tonight that will seek both to help restore his political stature and to convince an increasingly skeptical nation that he has a plan to end its economic trauma.
Advisers inside and outside the White House say that the President's job, beginning with tonight's nationally televised address to Congress is to demonstrate that he comprehends the pain of the recession and has a growth package to overcome it……The future of his presidency and his prospects for reelection could hang in the balance. ….The President himself has raised expectations for the speech to unusual levels, fending off questions since December about his economic recovery plan by saying that his answers would be contained in this address to the nation.”
What did Bush propose to lift the country out of recession?
- A moratorium on new government regulations on business.
- A cut in the capital gains tax.
- A tax credit for first-time home buyers.Elimination of many federal spending programs.
- A health-insurance tax credit for poor families.
