Yesterday, we got a reprehensible apology to BP from Joe Barton who apparently viewed President Obama's ability to get the company to set up $20 billion in an escrow account as a more shameful event than the spill itself. Democrats and even Republicans immediately reprehended Barton.
Easy enough, right? Everyone agrees that apologizing to BP and characterizing the White House meeting that resulted in the account a "shakedown" was wrong.
Well, no, because today in the New York Times ran a "news anaylsis" of the president's ability to arm-twist. It featured Barton's comments front-and-center, and compared Obama's approach to dealing with BP to his tough handling of the auto companies as they flailed.
With that display of raw arm-twisting, Mr. Obama reinvigorated a debate about the renewed reach of government power, or, alternatively, the power of government overreach. It is an argument that has come to define Mr. Obama’s first 18 months in office, and one that Mr. Obama clearly hopes to make a central issue in November’s midterm elections.
Is this spawning a real debate about the reach of government power, or a newspaper one? My guess would be the latter, because I thought this was exactly what we wanted the president to do. We're mad because he didn't pick up the phone to have a conversation with BP CEO Tony Hayward, but we saw how pointless a simple conversation with him was going to be. But now, Obama has a conversation with Hayward that results in something, and it's a shakedown and arm-twisting? I'd actually be happier if we saw some real arm-twisting from Obama.
-- Monica Potts
