Volume VI, Issue I

JHU POLITIKISSUE I, 2/7/11

Volume VI, Issue IFebruary 7, 2011

1

JOHNS HOPKINS’s Only Weekly-Published Political Magazine

Also in this Week’s Edition:

EGYPT: WHAT TO EXPECTWHEN YOU’RE EXPECTING

By Ari Schaffer, ‘14-Page 5

OPINION

www.JHUPOLITIK.com

INTRODUCING:JAY CARNEY

By Alex Clearfield, ‘14-Page 4

NATIONAL

REGAINGING “OMENTUM”

By Neil O’Donnell, ‘13

-Page 8

THE FATE OF THE UNION

By Randy Bell, ‘13

-Page 3

AN INSECURE FUTURE INDAVOSBy Eric Feinberg, ‘12

-Page 7

(Continued on Page 2)

THE REVOLUTIONWILL NOT BE TWEETED

hen the Mubarak govern-ment began to see signs of

massive unrest in the streets ofCairo it took a drastic measure: theEgyptian government turned off theInternet. On the morning of January28th, 80% of Egyptians woke up tofind that they no longer had Internetaccess. The blackout triggered a90% plunge in Egyptian data traffic.“In a fundamental sense,” explainedJim Cowie, the chief technology of-ficer at Rensys, “it’s as if yourewrote the map and they are nolonger a country.”

Egypt’s government does not havean on/off switch for the Internet. Toshutdown the Internet, the Egyptianregime forced Internet serviceproviders (ISPs) to halt connections.Essentially, the government used its

military power to compel the fourmajor service providers, TelecomEgypt, Vodafone/Raya, Link Egypt,and Etisalat Misr, to take the IP ad-dresses of all users offline. Recentlyinterviewed by Katie Couric, BillGates said that, “it's not that hard toshut the Internet down if you havemilitary power where you can tellpeople that's what's going to hap-pen.” By forcing ISPs to shutdowntheir networks, the government wasable to stop Egyptians from beingable to access the Internet. Voda-fone/Raya, for example, claimedthat it cooperated because the gov-ernment has the legal power to com-pel them to alter their routers.

In a mere matter of minutes, 14million people were deprived oftheir Internet access. No informa-

by Cary Glynn ‘13Staff Writer

tion could get in or out of Egypt viathe Web. While a few isolated ac-tivists managed to secure dial-upconnections, the vast majority ofEgyptians were left unconnected.Internationally, some groups havetried to help Egyptians access theInternet. The group of hackersknown as Anonymous, who previ-ously attacked websites they be-lieved impeded Wikileaks, hasattacked Egyptian government web-sites and infrastructure. Google andTwitter teamed up to create a way

W

(Moises Saman/ New York Times)

for Egyptians to call-in tweets, instead of posting themonline or through text messages. Additionally, Internetusers around the world have provided their own IP ad-dresses as cloaks for Egyptian users.

For autocratic regimes, limiting Internet access hasbecome the norm. China is notorious for blocking anti-government websites through it so-called “Great Fire-wall.” During the protests regarding the recent Iranianelection, the government severely reduced Internet ac-cess. In Myanmar, the military junta had some successcutting off bloggers’ Internet connections. “It’s almostbecome de rigueur during events like this – elections orpolitical demonstrations – to tamper with the Internet,”Professor Ronald Deibert, director of the Canada Centrefor Global Security Studies, said. The breadth of Egypt’sefforts to block the Internet, however, is unprecedented.

Egypt’s government seemingly sought to limit the de-gree to which the protestors could communicate, organ-ize, and disseminate information to Egyptians and therest of the world. Instead, many analysts argue, the gov-ernment has actually inadvertently fomented rebellion,stoked the anger of the protestors, and turned all Inter-net users against the establishment. A government thatcensors the entire Internet seems scared and defensive,and that only intensifies the hopes of the country’s re-bellious citizens. “The government has made a big mis-take taking away the option at people’s fingertips,” said

2


Professor Mohammed el-Nawawy of the communica-tions department at Queens University of Charlotte.“They’re taking their frustration to the streets.” Someexperts have even asserted that Internet access candampen political unrest because people spend their timetweeting from their keyboards instead of marching inthe streets.

Professor Diebert posited that the Egyptian govern-ment might have had an ulterior motive. “[After theblackout] what you’re left with are few spotty satelliteconnections which then really put a spotlight on thosewho may be the ringleaders of the protest,” he asserted.“There's a kind of surveillance angle to this.”

There has been a largely unnoticed ironic undertoneto Egypt’s Internet blackout. Many accuse a recently in-troduced bill in Congress of giving American presidentsthe authority to do exactly what Mubarak did. As mostAmerican politicians condemned Egyptian censorship,Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs commit-tee chairman Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) andSenators Susan Collins (R-ME) and Tom Carper (D-DE)introduced the “Protecting Cyberspace as a NationalAsset Act of 2010” (S. 348). Opponents claim that the billgives the president authority to shutdown the Internetduring emergencies.

When confronted with criticism the Senators stated:"we would never sign on to legislation that authorized

The POLITIKEDITOR-In-Chief

Joshua AyalEditor-in-Chief

Harry BlackEditor-in-Chief

Sam Lichtenstein

Executive Editors

Will DentonMorgan Hitzig

Hannah Holliday

Managing Editor

Matt Varvaro

Staff Writers

Randy BellAlex ClearfieldRachel CohenRohit DasguptaEric Feinberg

Becca FishbeinConor FoleyCary Glynn

Benjamin GoldbergPaul GrossingerDan HochmanJordan KalmsAnna KochutHilary MatfessDaniel Roettger

Faculty Advisor

Steven R. David

JHU POLITIK is a student-run politicalpublication. Please note that the opin-ions expressed within JHU POLITIK arethose solely of the author.

Please sign up for our e-mail list on ourwebsite, www.JHUPOLITIK.com

INTERNATIONAL REPORT

www.JHUPOLITIK.com

(Continued from Page 1)


PRODUCTION MANAGERS

Casey NavinNeil O’Donnell


President Joe Biden, a sign of the political pendulumswinging back in the Republicans' favor. Because of thebalancing scale of power in the legislative branch and amore cooperative political climate, President Obama andthe newly integrated Congress understood the need tofocus on the issues, rather than making this year's Stateof the Union a political pep rally. As an example of thepresident’s new openness, when talking about energypolicy he said, "some folks want wind and solar. Otherswant nuclear, clean coal, and natural gas. To meet thisgoal, we will need them all – and I urge Democrats andRepublicans to work together to make it happen."

With open ears and softened hearts, members of the112th Congress, Cabinet members, and civilians alike lis-tened to the President's speech, which he said he hadbeen working on since the midterm elections in Novem-ber. Obama's main concern was with the economy, a se-rious issue for many Americans as the unemploymentrate lingers at nearly ten percent. In the past, Obama fo-cused his efforts on policies the government made to ad-just the economy for the better, such as supporting theTARP program passed under the Bush administration in2008, passing the stimulus bill in 2009, and enforcingmany new safeguards to protect the American peoplefrom hidden fees, penalties, and actions that could causeanother financial crisis. This time, Obama focused onwhat we as a community can do together to deal with thefloundering economy and return to our previous glory.

At the crux of Obama's message was a reminder thatplaying the role of underdog and coming out victoriouswas in this country's DNA. He cited the space race be-tween the United States and the Soviet Union in the1950's and 1960's, where the Soviets beat the Americansinto launching Sputnik, the first man-made object sentinto orbit. Instead of falling behind, the United Stateswas able to beat the Soviets to the moon and show thetrue potential of American spirit and ingenuity. "This isour generation's Sputnik moment", said Obama. "Twoyears ago, I said that we needed to reach a level of re-search and development we haven't seen since the heightof the Space Race. In a few weeks, I will be sending abudget to Congress that helps us meet that goal. We'll in-vest in biomedical research, information technology, andespecially clean energy technology - an investment thatwill strengthen our security, protect our planet, and cre-ate countless new jobs for our people."

Obama stressed the importance of where this innova-tion and work ethic begins: in the home and the schools.He reminded us of how the United States is slipping be-

3


the President, or anyone else, to shut down the Internet.Emergency or not, the exercise of such broad authoritywould be an affront to our Constitution.” It remains tobe seen what effect the Egyptian internet shutdown willhave on Egypt’s political future, let alone America’s. s

The Fate of the Union

by Randy Bell, ‘13Staff Writer

On January 25th, President Barack Obama deliveredhis second State of the Union, a speech noted for takingplace in the shadow of January's tragic shooting in Ari-zona and a new call for civil discourse in Washington,which the Commander-in-Chief seemed to argue forwith a sense of urgency. In years past, spectators of theState of the Union have gotten first row seats to a sort ofcircus: a sea of legislators divided according to color –red or blue – and each half would rise when promptedby political rhetoric favoring its platform. It reminds oneof Moses parting the Red Sea as the Jews fled fromEgypt. This year, however, was different. In the wake ofthe Tucson shooting, sworn political enemies swallowedtheir pride and mixed among one another in the spirit ofbipartisanship, even leaving a seat open for Arizona con-gresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, who is still recoveringfrom the attempt on her life.

President Obama took to the stage with a differentface behind him and to the left. Congressman JohnBoehner, now the new Speaker of the House after re-placing Nancy Pelosi when Republicans took back con-trol of the House in November, sat alongside Vice

INTERNATIONAL REPORT / NATIONAL REPORT

www.JHUPOLITIK.com



(Pete Souza)

Introducing: Jay Carney

by Alex Clearfield, ‘14Staff Writer

On January 27, Jay Carney, a former journalist and cur-rent Director of Communications for Vice President JoeBiden, was named as the replacement for outgoingWhite House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. Gibbs willleave the post later this month. Carney was the chief ofTime magazine’s Washington Bureau from 2005-2008until becoming part of Biden’s staff. Carney, who was nota member of President Obama’s close group of advisors,is the second consecutive major White House appoint-ment of someone from outside the inner sanctum, fol-lowing the appointment of Chief of Staff William Daley,the former Mayor of Chicago.

The choice of Carney is seen by many as another moveto the center by Obama, whose party lost its majority inthe House after November’s midterm elections. After aproductive lame duck session – marked by the Demo-cratic victory of repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and thepassage of the New START treaty – the new 112th Con-gress has taken a much different tack. The House of Rep-resentatives has already passed a repeal of the healthcare reform law. Although blocked in the Senate, the re-peal was more of a symbolic gesture than a realistic one,and was meant to send a message to the president thatthe voters have repudiated his policies.

Outgoing Press Secretary Robert Gibbs has been asso-ciated with Obama since his Senate campaign in 2004,and enjoys the same level of access that senior advisorValerie Jarrett and former senior advisor David Axelrodhave enjoyed. However, Gibbs has not often been the

4


hind other countries in fields like math and science andhow we value winning the Super Bowl over winning thescience fair. To solve our economic woes and cripplingdebt, the president argued that investment in knowledgewill be key to returning to former glory by mentioningthat "cutting the deficit by gutting our investments in in-novation and education is like lightening an overloadedairplane by removing its engine. It may feel like you'reflying high at first, but it won't take long before you'll feelthe impact." President Obama also reminded Americansof the difficult truth that the climbing debt would re-quire necessary cuts, and announced plans for a five-yearfreeze on domestic spending to save $400 billion, gettingrid of billions of dollars in tax breaks for oil companies,banning earmarks, and ending the Bush tax cuts for therichest 2%. Showing further signs of reaching a handacross the aisle, Obama said he would be willing to workwith Republicans in reforming the health care billpassed last year.

Obama touched on a variety of issues, from the Ari-zona shooting to unemployment and the debt, to invest-ing in education and replacing No Child Left Behind. Hecovered illegal immigration, our commitment to fightingterrorism in Afghanistan, and the beginning of troopwithdrawal in July to contending with nuclear prolifer-ation in Iran and North Korea.

One topic of interest that was not mentioned was guncontrol. Although President Obama says that he is com-mitted to addressing the issue of high capacity maga-zines and other contributing factors to the Tusconshooting, New York Democratic Representative CarolynMcCarthy says Obama has a lot on his plate and that guncontrol could have been put on the back burner for thespeech. While even prominent Republics like GeorgeBush and Dick Cheney advocate betters forms of guncontrol, their proposals often conflict with the ideas ofmany on the political left. While the inside word out ofWashington is that the president will begin to promotea national conversation about guns, no one is sure ofwhen or how. Perhaps the only certainty is that it will bea difficult task for a president who has lost his majorityin the House to convince Americans – and one of thecountry’s most powerful lobbies, the National Rifle As-sociation – that his eventual proposals should be en-acted. Get ready for some hardball politics. s

NATIONAL REPORT

www.JHUPOLITIK.com




5

most popular with the press, and has had no issue takinga combative tone to defend the administration’s policies.Gibbs will continue to be associated with Obama in a yetto be determined capacity.

Carney is coming into the job from a much differentposition. A journalist by trade, Carney covered Americanpolitics for most of his career, including the 2008 presi-dential race. His move to behind the podium, while un-common for White House Press Secretaries, is notunprecedented; former George W. Bush Press SecretaryTony Snow was a former journalist.

Carney will endure a trial by fire, having to deal withthe press regarding the ongoing situation in Egypt. Forthe most part, the press had been impatient with Gibbs’handling of questions regarding the situation, but Gibbshas said that he does not want to “dip [his] toe into thepool of generalization.”

It is expected that Carney will take a “friendlier” ap-proach than Gibbs, which seemingly goes hand-in-handwith the White House’s recent moderation. PresidentObama’s State of the Union address on January 25th in-cluded some traditionally conservative pledges, such asa proposal to ban earmarks, freeze domestic spendingfor five years, and lower the corporate tax rate. The over-all theme of the State of the Union address was one ofsustaining competitiveness in the global marketplace, arelatively apolitical motif.

Things such as the swift rise of the Tea Party and themidterm election results point to a desire for more con-servative government. Democrats hoped Obama wouldbe akin to a modern-day Franklin Roosevelt, getting leg-islation passed with the flick of a wrist. However, Roo-sevelt and the Democrats enjoyed unprecedentedmajorities, at one point outnumbering Republicans 344-88 in the House. Obama entered with a large House ma-jority and a nearly filibuster-proof Senate majority. Thepresident was lucky to get some legislation, such as thehealth care bill, passed, considering that Republicans didall in their power to block debate on many bills. Now,with a Democratic Senate and Republican House,Obama has had to meet the Republicans halfway, if notmore.

The relationship an administration enjoys with thepress goes a long way toward determining how theWhite House will be covered, and in what tone theWhite House frames events. Robert Gibbs has defendedthe administration like a guard dog, which has turnedoff some in the press. Carney is less combative, andhopefully for the White House will be effective at bothcommunicating the administration’s messages and co-

operating with the press. With Obama’s approval ratingsat around 50%, the White House will need all the help itcan garner from the press leading up to the 2012 election. s

Egypt: What to Expect When You’re Expecting

by Ari SchafferStaff Writer

Leaders around the world watch with bated breath asthe turmoil unfolds throughout the Middle East. Whatbegan with a small flame in Tunisia has erupted intoprotests and anti-government demonstrations in Egypt,Lebanon, Yemen, Algeria and Sudan. Countries thoughtto be hotbeds of corruption and entrenched tyranniesare showing promise and, despite their violent progres-sion most evident in Egypt, resounding with the faintring of democracy. However, as glossy-eyed Westernerswatch demonstrations throughout the Middle East hop-ing they will answer true democracy’s call, the strongsupport for some of the ousted dictators and the loomingthreat of Islamic extremism dim the horizon. Western-style democracy will remain just a dream and a hope forall, whether it is for the people of these countries whojust want rights and freedoms, or for those of the U.S. andthe Europe who simply hope for peace.

The revolutions got off to a good start, though.Granted, they were precipitated by a desperate Tunisiansetting himself on fire, which can only be a bad omen,but the movements progressed strongly, albeit quickly,after that. Before long, protesters flooded the streets ofTunisia challenging the long rule of President Ben Ali.

NATIONAL REPORT / OPINION

www.JHUPOLITIK.com

(AP)



(Miguel Medina/ AFP)


6

The violence escalated and the death toll began to rise.As the protests continued and intensified, the armybegan to patrol the streets, but to no avail. Within amonth of the first self-emollition, President Ben Ali hadfled the country, the Lebanese government had fallenapart, and unrest had grown in the nearby countries ofAlgeria and Jordan over rising food prices. Then, just asTunisia became engulfed in prison riots and shootings,Egypt retook its position as the leader of Middle East,and had some rioting of its own. The revolutions thathad begun with hope for a brighter future, with youngcollege graduates fighting for a better life, had devolvedinto chaos.

It is understandable that there would be violence dur-ing this most crucial period of transition for the hopefulnations of Tunisia and Egypt. Those who espouse “de-mocratic peace theory”, which suggests that democra-cies nearly never go to war with each other, argue thatthe transition to democracy is usually filled with vio-lence and aggression. The American Revolution was firstand foremost a war for independence and France’s firstjump toward democracy featured the Reign of Terror.Yet, those who have been reading the news for the lasthalf century, or at least since September 11, 2001, knowthat violence from the Middle East tends to take a dif-ferent form. There is one particular strain that hasspelled disaster for democracies around the world, im-peded the peace process over and over again, andstricken fear in the hearts of all forward-looking nationsof the world: Islamic extremism.

While the Muslim Brotherhood, by far Egypt’s largestIslamist opposition group, is deliberately remainingquiet throughout the protests, the fear that it is waitingjust beyond the shadows has plagued Egypt’s revolu-tions since day one. In fact, throughout his presidency,President Mubarak of Egypt has repeatedly used thepresence of it and other extremist groups to expand hispower. Citing the threat of extremism as justification forhis actions, Mubarak has put down protests and almostentirely stifled dissent. However, with Mubarak seem-ingly one protest away from expulsion from the country,there is a strong possibility that Egypt’s only other or-ganized political party, the Muslim Brotherhood, willtake power.

If that happens, then subtle ring of democracy will, inall likelihood, disappear from the Middle East. An ex-tremist government in Egypt will just bring more of thesame corruption and suppression that Syria and Iranoffer. It will slowly but surely undo all of the progressEgypt has made in its development toward freedom and

democracy. It will block up the paths that Egypt haspaved toward international cooperation, effectively clos-ing them off for the foreseeable future. If the MuslimBrotherhood takes control, all hope will be lost. Egyptwill no doubt retain its position as a leader of the MiddleEast and bring Tunisia, Jordan and Yemen down with it.Lebanon has already fallen to Hezbollah and Jordan isslowly folding to its own branch of the Muslim Brother-hood. The prospects do not look good.

Another factor to consider is the scarcity of democ-racy in Muslim countries. As of now, few Islamic statescan be called democratic and an even smaller numberhave shed the extremism often tied to Islamic govern-ments. Turkey alone stands as a strong secular democ-racy in the Middle East but it is turning away from itslong history of secularism and embracing the more rad-ical cultures of its neighbors. Some argue that this sepa-ration between the Arab nations and the democracies ofthe West is inevitable, democracy being contradictory tothe ideals and values of the Muslim peoples. With thisin mind, transition to a successful democracy in anyMuslim nation is impossible, regardless of the condi-tions or apparent calls for reform. Like the Islam Revo-lution of 1979, these revolutions too will give rise toextremist theocracies, not the democracy the people callfor.

Fortunately, the fight is not yet lost. Spots of sun glim-mer on the horizon throughout the Middle East. NobelPrize-winner and political moderate Mohammed ElBa-radei has emerged as a strong political figure in Egypt,winning the support of both democrats and Islamistanti-government leaders. Sudan is on the verge of endingits decades-long civil wars that have cost the lives ofmore than two million people. The Muslim Brother-hood, which progressives across the world dread most,has joined its democratic friends and demanded free andfair elections. Although the lights of hope are only faintglimmers in the distance and the calls for total freedomseem like little more than whispers, they are still pres-ent. And if there is anything that these revolutions havetaught us, it is that one flame can start a revolution.

In the grand scheme of things though, there are littlemore than whispers and illusions of hope. Even if theprotesters in Tahrir Square do cause the ousting of Pres-ident Mubarak, there is a good chance that the MuslimBrotherhood will take power in his place. The fire of rev-olution will be engulfed by the blaze of Islamic extrem-ism that will take Tunisia, Jordan, and other countrieswith it. The spread of radicalism will maintain its course

OPINION

www.JHUPOLITIK.com




7

and renew conflict between the Middle East and the restof the world. The few rays of hope can take hold and leadthese chaotic nations to a new, better age, but either waythe glossy-eyed Westerners should be ready and waryfor the worst. s

An Insecure Future in Davos

by Eric Feinberg, ‘12Staff Writer

Spanning the five days from January 26th to the 30th,this year’s World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzer-land, highlighted the uncertainty in the global economythat still remains after the financial collapse of 2008.However, due largely to increasingly coordinated inter-national recovery efforts, there has been a marked in-crease in confidence from the last two conferences,during which catastrophe was still a looming danger.

Some of you may be wondering what Davos is or whyyou weren’t invited. Do not fret: unless you’re a majorCEO, minister of finance, economics professor at Har-vard, or multi-billionaire investor, you probably neverhad a shot. Only some 2,000 invitations are extendedeach year, including this year to people such as: BritishPrime Minister David Cameron, French President Nico-las Sarkozy, U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner,and former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger.

Two of the themes this year were particularly pre-scient. The first was the growing sense of apprehensionabout the Euro currency system. The debt crises in Eu-rope have revealed the inherent weakness in the systemthat some economists foresaw early, namely the fiscal in-

flexibility it imposes. Greece, for instance, is an exampleof a nation that would do well now to devalue its cur-rency but is unable to do so since the Euro is suprana-tional. At Davos, financial experts were talking openlyabout some countries dropping the Euro in the next fewyears, which would have been unimaginable before thecrisis.

The second important theme related to the rise of de-veloping nations like India and China, which has alsobeen talked about with unprecedented openness sincethe state visit of Chinese President Hu Jintao to theUnited States in January. A consensus appears to beemerging that the global economic hegemony of theWest is coming to an end in the all-too-near future. Thisnotion was echoed in the State of the Union Address,with President Obama urging Congress to make criticalinvestments in the workforce or risk falling behind thesebudding competitors.

What is the bottom line? In the last decade, the Amer-ican political conversation has placed a tremendous em-phasis on our own parochial national problems, i.e. thebudget deficit, the spending on the wars, entitlementprograms. My impression is that the rise of externalpressures like those discussed at Davos may just be theimpetus we need to get past this partisan gridlock. As ourreal competitors grow stronger, the tolerance for politi-cal theater will drop off rapidly.

For analogies, I always look to Ancient Greece. In ar-chaic times, the various Greek city-states fought eachother all the time for reasons of varying importance;more often than not it would be over something pettylike a patch of land or a perceived insult. But then, whena serious threat emerged from Persia, the Greeks puttheir trivial differences in perspective and allied for thepurpose of defeating their common enemy. In moderntimes, Americans attack each other all the time for rea-sons of varying importance; more often than not it is oversomething petty like civil unions or whether citizens canreally claim their anti-aircraft guns are for hunting. Myhope is that as the American people begin to see theirproblems as emerging not from Republicans or Democ-rats but from the Chinese or Russians, and that as theylearn the price of disunity, they'll start taking politics se-riously again. Let this be the lesson of Davos. s

OPINION

www.JHUPOLITIK.com



8

Regaining “Omentum”:The Reasons for theSustained Rise in President Obama’s PollNumbers

by Neil O’Donnell, ‘13Production Manager

Since receiving a so-called “shellacking” in themidterm elections, the President’s approval numbershave jumped upwards. According to a poll by the WallStreet Journal conducted on January 17, 53% of Ameri-cans approve of President Obama’s performance in theWhite House, while only 41% of Americans disapproveof the way he is handling his job. This poll represents asignificant increase from a poll conducted by the paperon December 13, in which only 45% of Americans ap-proved of the president’s performance and 48% disap-proved of President Obama’s job asCommander-in-Chief.

President Obama first received praise for his success-ful lame-duck session. The president compromised withCongressional Republicans on a bill to extend the Bushtax cuts, a measure that will provide much needed sup-port to the economy. Former Republican CongressmanJoe Scarborough, the eponymous host of MSNBC’sMorning Joe, stated that Obama’s compromise to extendthe tax cuts amounted to “a second stimulus package,”which may have even greater efficacy than the presi-dent’s first stimulus plan. Furthermore, the president’squick, tactful compromise on tax cuts allowed the Con-gress to pass several crucial initiatives including: the rat-ification of the New START treaty with Russia, the 9/11First-Responders bill, and legislation on food safety. AsPresident Obama said in late December, “I think it’s fairto say that this has been the most productive periodwe’ve had in decades.” President Obama’s success inpushing through these measures (after months of Con-gressional gridlock) has indeed improved his approvalrating.

In addition to his legislative triumphs, PresidentObama has seen more success in providing Americanswith a clear message of the objectives of his administra-tion. After the tragic shootings in Tucson, PresidentObama’s speech at the victim’s memorial service waspitch perfect. President Obama encouraged our increas-ingly fractured nation to rise above partisan politics. Ashe stated, “I believe that we can be better…those whodied here, those who saved lives here – they help me be-lieve. We may not be able to stop all the evil in the world,

but I know that how we treat one another is entirely upto us.” The president’s speech was widely praised byboth Democrats and Republicans. Andrea Tantaros, aconservative political writer for The New York DailyNews, observed, “President Obama acutely understoodour collective need to heal on Wednesday night.” Thepresident’s finely tuned rhetoric was juxtaposed by aclumsy speech by Sarah Palin. Said Bill Maher host ofHBO’s Real Time, President Obama gave a timely speechto heal our nation and “Sarah Palin gave the rebuttal.”

The president’s post-partisan stance was further ex-pounded in his State of the Union Address. The spcchoffered more potential compromises with CongressionalRepublicans. President Obama stated that he wouldlobby to lower America’s high corporate tax rate, if Re-publicans would close several tax loopholes. Even KarlRove had some praise for President Obama’s State of theUnion. In an Article on FoxNews.com, President Bush’sformer Senior Advisor stated that the some of the Pres-ident’s proposed reforms “show that he is in touch withjob creators.” Throughout the State of the Union, thepresident demonstrated a commitment to compromisewith Republicans in order to improve America and movethe nation forward.

President Obama’s recent success in legislation andoration has already increased his approval ratingsamong Americans. Yet, President Obama’s recent victo-ries may translate into far more than higher job ap-proval. After gleaning 63 seats in the United StatesHouse of Representatives, the Republicans are poised toobstruct the initiatives of the Obama Administration.Without tactful, political footwork by President Obama,Washington may become ensconced in more gridlockand partisanship. If Capitol Hill reaches an impasse,President Obama’s Administration will fail to fix theeconomy, to improve the education system, and toachieve many of its other goals. Yet if President Obamacan continue to successfully and constructively compro-mise with Republicans, he can continue to push throughhis reforms and change the course of the nation that isheaded in the wrong direction.

In 1980, President Reagan tried to spur on a nationsaddled by malaise and uncertainty. His reforms, whichincluded lower taxes and less government intervention,intended to kickstart American industry, and were en-compassed by the term “the Reagan correction.” Presi-dent Obama desires to again reform American industryand “to provide a correction to the Reagan correction.”This lofty goal seemed impossible after a shellacking lastNovember, but his recent successes demonstrate that hestill has the potential to achieve his goals. s

OPINION

www.JHUPOLITIK.com

Documents

Volume VI, Issue I