Looking Good, Barack!

This has been a good couple of weeks for President Obama.

With just over a year to go to the election, any prediction I make now could well be dead wrong.  But for now, the President's prospects are looking good.

The big story, of course, is Thursday's killing of Muammar Qaddafi, Libyan strongman, "mad dog of the Middle East", and one of America's main bogey-men since the Reagan administration.  Does Obama get the credit for this?  Sure he does; his Administration's plan in Libya was brilliant in its "less-is-more" low-key simplicity-- the polar opposite of his predecessor's big spending, big talking and far less effective efforts in Iraq.  Obama spent around $1 billion in Libya (about 0.1% of the Iraq war), and let the allies do most of the heavy lifting and take most of the credit.  But does anyone seriously think this could have succeeded without U.S. technological and political backing?

Then, there is yesterday's news that we will be pulling all troops out of Iraq by the end of the year, finally cleaning up Bush's worst foreign-policy mess, just as Obama said he would.  Sure, critics warn of a resurgent and dangerous Iran, and the dangers it poses in the region.  But if this is the fear, Obama has rapidly proven that he is the best man to deal with the threat -- with his successful targeting of senior al-Qaeda figures (remember Osama Bin-Laden?)  and aggressive drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen he has shown that he is no weakling, and Iran discounts him as an adversary at their own risk.

Whether polls show it or not, military and foreign policy is the most important job of any President, and Obama is now second to none on this front.  Who can challenge him when it comes to our security and vital interests: Romney? Perry? Cain?  Hah!

As far as the economy goes, most say that this will decide the election.  But this has been a good week for Obama as well, with the recent signing of free trade agreements with Korea, Colombia and Panama (in descending order of economic importance).  This won't turn the economy around on a dime, but will increase overall prosperity for years to come, and is an issue that has always had broad bipartisan centrist support.  And, as reported in today's Wall Street Journal, it has helped lead to a "thaw" in the Senate, which has allowed the confirmation of several judges and other officials that had been "held" for Senate approval for months.

Speaking of the economy, I think the nation is coming to realize that we are in the midst of a long slog, as Americans become more thrifty and save more, reducing consumption, and thus slowing economic growth (see today's WSJ, Spenders Become Savers, Hurting Recovery, by Jon Hilsenrath and Ruth Simon).   I believe this might be the beginning of a more sane, sustainable economy, one that is not based on living in a bigger house than you really need, having more (and bigger) cars and appliances than you can use, and financing them with debt.  Yes, commerce and dreaming big are American values, but so are modesty, simplicity, spirituality and sacrifice.  The idealist in me thinks that Americans can live happier and better lives without a high economic growth rate fueled by ever-increasing consumption.  But one of the keys has to be a more equitable distribution of wealth.

There is a national heritage that we are all part of, and which contributes in large part to our well-being as individuals.  In this I would include our roads, our national parks, our education system, our social security system, our system of medical care (which is now close to 50% publicly funded), not to mention our rich history and culture.  By concentrating on these things, we build wealth for the entire country that we can all share in, and that cannot be taken away from any American.  The days of a consumption-based economy, where the middle class buys more than they need, and the rich make a killing off their unnecessary purchases are over.

I hope that people are coming to realize that Republican policies that aim to take us back to this type of consumption-based economy are not appropriate in today's world.  I hope that the widespread public support for the "Occupy Wall Street" movement are a symptom of this realization.  So far, Obama is the only candidate who seems to get this, and offer something approaching a reasonable way forward.