Is Obama this SMART?? BRILLIANT NYT reader comment with SOLUTION to Afghanistan decision.

chimpymustgo

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Dec-01-09 11:42 AM
Original message

Is Obama this SMART?? BRILLIANT NYT reader comment with SOLUTION to Afghanistan decision.

This is a comment to Bob Herbert's "A Tragic Mistake" in the NYT. Is there any chance Obama could do this? It would be BRILLIANT. Does he have the guts? What do you think?

9.
MNW
Connecticut
December 1st, 2009
7:20 am

A serious, viable, realistic, politically expedient scenario follows:

President Obama presents his case for additional troops for Afghanistan, along with the rationale for this action, and fulfills the requests of military commanders and Secretary of Defense Gates. Whether or not his reasoning is compelling remains to be seen.

He will then call upon the Congress to establish a Draft to supply the necessary manpower for these additional troops. He will also ask the Congress for an increase in taxes - via the tax code or by a special war tax - to provide the revenues to cover the costs of expanded operations in Afghanistan. Failure to take these steps represents a lack of responsible leadership and a neglect of the fiscally prudent measures necessary to support a continued costly war effort. (Note www.costofwar.com)

The ball will thus be firmly placed in the Congressional "court", which is exactly where it belongs, given the requirements of the US Constitution. As a Constitutional scholar and professor of this subject matter, the President is well aware of these necessary steps in the process of shared governance with the Congress. Wars and the purse strings are the provenance of the Congress and rightly so, as the Congress represents the people - or at least they have a moral obligation to do so.

This approach, if Obama has the fortitude for it, will be a master stroke - politically speaking - and totally compatible with his nature. (Remember that the ball is in their court.) There will be no more avoidance of war-making decisions by the Congress who prefer to spare themselves and to leave it up to any President. (Great skirts to hide behind.) Why put their political lives on the line, after all. But then there is that pesky Constitution.

The usual resulting chaos in the Congress will place the Republicans war seekers on the horns of a dilemma (with friction in their ranks) because they prefer not to ask for a Draft (politically dangerous as the electorate on the whole does not favor war escalation) and they prefer to avoid taxes of any kind as they believe only in a "borrow and spend" mode of fiscal activity. All their concerns regarding deficit spending (remember Health Care reform) will disappear immediately, strangely enough.

Sensible Congressional Democrats will weigh the political consequences and support neither the Draft, the taxes, or the war in Afghanistan in its entirety. (Sorry, Mr. President, but our constituents do not support these efforts.) Or they will do what they do best - forego a unified front, and that for once will be to our advantage. Obama will retire to the Oval Office, look over the Rose Garden, and await Congressional decisions. (I await also - all the Op-Eds.)

The monkey wrench, of course, is if Obama throws in with the Republicans, which means he isn't as thoughtful or politically astute as one might hope. But then is being a one-term President worth a problematic "finish the job" proclamation and its possible failure? (And we do need him as a Democrat, in the last analysis.) Who's to say, but a viable third party candidate may have my vote this next time around, since I prefer careful thinkers in any political driver's seat. (And the above scenario does get him off the Afghanistan hook, after all. Not a bad result.)

So lessons are learned and we may have to finally accept the fact that possibly charismatic oratory does have its limitations. Fool me once......

http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2009/12/01/opinion/01herbert.html?sort=recommended