Fascinating article from AP, in which some Democrats are saying that Obama is being too nice to Bush, staying too far out of the limelight, and rather, that Obama should inject himself into the middle of the economic crisis debate NOW.
Democrats are growing impatient with President-elect Barack Obama's refusal to inject himself in the major economic crises confronting the country. Obama has sidestepped some policy questions by saying there is only one president at a time. But the dodge is wearing thin. "He's going to have to be more assertive than he's been," House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass., told consumer advocates Thursday.At first I thought, give Obama a break. But then I read the article, and Barney Frank is right. We don't have two presidents. We don't have one. Bush is doing nothing, he's worse than a lame duck. When Bush and Bernanke and the rest of them talk, the markets plummet. We need a new president now. Is it appropriate for Obama to be even more outspoken about what he wants, even though he isn't yet president? Can we afford to wait 6 weeks until Obama is sworn in?
Frank, who has been dealing with both the bailout of the financial industry and a proposed rescue of Detroit automakers, said Obama needs to play a more significant role on economic issues.
"At a time of great crisis with mortgage foreclosures and autos, he says we only have one president at a time," Frank said. "I'm afraid that overstates the number of presidents we have. He's got to remedy that situation."
Obama has maintained one of the most public images of any president-elect. He has held half a dozen press conferences, where he has entertained question after question about the economy, the mortgage crisis, and the flailing auto industry. He called for passage of extended unemployment benefits — which has passed — and even a stimulus package if possible before Jan. 20. But he has stayed away from trying to dictate remedies for the toughest problems Congress is confronting: the auto industry's troubles and how to spend the $700 billion bailout.
