June 16, 2010--Bloomberg For President?

For nearly three years whenever Barack Obama made a speech or held a town meeting, if I possibly could, I would cancel other plans in an attempt to listen to him. He was that interesting, that compelling, that eloquent and smart. What a relief, I felt, after eight years of the less-than-inspiring, foot-in-the-mouth George Bush. And I knew many people who felt the same way. My sister-in-law, Sharon, for example, called it getting her daily "Obama fix."

But last night I took a pass. Even though he was to give his first Oval Office address, I was feeling that I've had enough of him for a while. So we went to a late dinner and almost finished a bottle of wine. I'm sure the disenchantment I was feeling had something to do with all the drinking.

Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson had a lot to do with my state of being. In his column yesterday (linked below) this otherwise erstwhile supporter of Obama took him and his administration to task for not responding quickly enough to other nations' offers to help clean up the massive oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico and for deferring for too long to BP and its estimates about the extent of the spill and its promises to cap the well, protect the beaches, and clean up the fetid mess.

Many nations from Sweden to Mexico to the Netherlands for weeks, for months now have been trying to get BP's and our government's attention, to respond to their offers to send state-of-the-art oil skimmers to the area and to in other ways help. We have responded to some; but others, frustrated, are still waiting to hear back from either BP or the administration.

Often it has been a matter of entangled and competing bureaucrats protecting their turf and being off the case. In other instances politics or corporate rivalries are at play. Here are some examples from another Washington Post article that contains original reporting:

In [some] instances, domestic politics are at play. Dutch authorities have worked in Louisiana since Katrina hit and were among the first to offer to help. After some hesitation, BP has obtained the state-of-the-art Dutch skimmers, two of which are in operation. Meanwhile, a massive sand-dredging operation is moving slowly.

In some cases, the administration rejected offers because they failed to meet U.S. specifications: The private consortium that serves as Norway's spill-response team uses a chemical dispersant that the Environmental Protection Agency has not approved.

In other cases, domestic politics are at play. Dutch authorities have worked in Louisiana since Katrina hit and were among the first to offer to help. After some hesitation, BP has obtained the state-of-the-art Dutch skimmers, two of which are in operation. Meanwhile, a massive sand-dredging operation is moving slowly.

A plan by Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) to create sand berms to keep oil from reaching the coastline originally came from the marine contractor Van Oord and the research institute Deltares, both in the Netherlands. BP pledged $360 million for the plan, but U.S. dredging companies -- which have less than one-fifth of the capacity of Dutch dredging firms -- have objected to foreign companies' participation.

Reading Gene Robinson and digging deeper into stories made me so crazy that I decided to tune Obama out. Not because the Obama administration failed to act in a timely way (and I am not talking about his seeming indifference and lack of outrage at the tragedy--though he could do much, much better in this regard) but rather because he did not see this to be a national emergency and respond to it as if war had been declared in the Gulf. This time, in our Gulf.

After the lessons of Katrina (a lesser disaster) and the lack of federal government caring and its incompetence I expected much more, much better from my president.

So we went out to a late dinner and drank too much wine.

And over dinner we talked about the 2012 presidential election. This in the context of having recently read a number of histories and biographies about the American Revolution and the first of our presidents--Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and Madison. Especially how Washington was by far the most effective of the four. He was not as well educated as the others, he was not as polished, he was not as fully versed in political theory and philosophy, he was the least eloquent, and could barely write a coherent sentence (Hamilton and Madison wrote most of his stuff); but yet he had the clearest vision of America's future, our place in the world, and how to get there. He was supremely gifted in what we might today call practical intelligence.

Obama, in comparison, though as intellectually talented and as well educated as the other three of our founders appears to be lacking in this kind of real-world experience and intelligence. I'm sure last night's speech was another masterpiece of thought and execution; but, again, I opted to ignore it. I have been looking for effective leadership, for effective action, and beyond some significant legislative victories (health care reform at the top of the list) it is lacking. Not only is the Gulf of Mexico ruined fo generations and the lives of millions destroyed, but Obama's efforts (his, not Bush's) in Afghanistan are turning into an on-going disaster, no progress is apparent in the Middle East (things actually seem to be getting worse there since he took office), we are in danger of losing Turkey as an essential ally, and of course the economy is still reeling.

So, over dinner, Rona and I began to talk about New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg as a possible independent candidate for president in 2012. He is as boring and uncharismatic as they come, but drips competence and accomplishment. First in business, where he built from scratch a colossal financial services company and amassed a personal net worth of at least $18 billion, and now as mayor serving in, as it is said, the second toughest job in America. He could self-finance a national campaign (writing a check for $2.0 billion wouldn't be a problem or leave him strapped--he could still pay for his daughter's horses) and thus he would be less beholden to the usual funders of politicians--the banks and oil industries.

He's far from perfect. For example, though he hasn't needed their money for his campaigns, he is too cozied up to the financial industry as it is currently structured (perhaps he has to be, considering their essential contributions to New York City's economy), but he gets the job done. Think about how he would have responded to and took charge from day one of the Gulf catastrophe. We wouldn't have heard a lot of fancy speeches or seen much faux passion, but I suspect he would have gotten the attention of the parties responsible, held their feet to the fire, and mobilized a well-organized and effective government effort.

It grieves me to be coming to this conclusion about Obama and his administration. Like most Americans I still like him, but George Washington was not likable and he was arguably our most successful president. I am thinking that in these perilous times, perhaps almost as dangerous as in the early days of our republic when our very future was uncertain, we need someone in charge who knows how to accomplish big and complicated things. Someone who has demonstrated, not just promised, that he or she can successfully take on big challenges. Bloomberg is for certain no Washington, but he may be the very kind of person we need in the White House.