Obama's Rolling Stone interview: portrait of a failing president

I rarely read “Rolling Stone” magazine, and I was reminded of why when I read the current issue’s cover story.

The story chronicles an interview with President Barack Obama conducted by the magazine’s publisher, Jann S. Wenner.

I found it illuminating on several counts.

First, it demonstrated Obama’s warped sense of his responsibilities as president.

In response to one of Wenner’s few difficult questions, the president said his “number one job [during the early days of his administration] was making sure that we did not have a full-fledged financial meltdown.”

Upon reading this, I asked myself whether that sounds anything like the oath Obama took to “faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States” and to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.”

After reviewing the powers granted to the president in the Constitution, I am fairly certain it doesn’t.

The second illuminating aspect of the story was Obama’s inflated sense of his own accomplishments, which might be linked to his apparent belief that the president’s job is to micromanage the economy.

When answering one of Wenner’s more overt softball questions, Obama claimed that he had “prevent[ed] a Great Depression” and that he “ended one of those wars,” referring to the Iraq War.

This, of course, totally ignores the important contributions of his predecessor and the military to steering the conflict toward a tolerable conclusion.

Before listing these and other accomplishments, Obama asserted that he had done these things “in the most adverse circumstances imaginable.”

Given that these things occurred at a time when his party enjoyed large majorities in both houses of Congress, I can only assume he means the situation of the country during the last 20 months has been worse than the Civil War, the Great Depression and World War II, to name just a few sets of adverse circumstances in our history.

Third, Obama demonstrated his strong propensity to mischaracterize both the actions and the motives of the Republican opposition in Congress.

In a discussion of last year’s stimulus package, he mentioned meeting with GOP leaders to “present our ideas and to solicit ideas from them before we presented the final package.”

He said that prior to the meeting, the Republicans issued a statement that essentially said they would be voting against the bill as a bloc.

Although this sounds like an example of cynical partisanship on just the GOP’s part, take a look at the end of that last quote. Obama was going to seek their ideas after his party had essentially crafted the whole bill without GOP input.

Sounds more like both parties were playing partisan games, which shouldn’t surprise anyone.

Finally, the piece showcased Obama’s deficient understanding of both his opponents and his supporters.

In response to a question about taxes, Obama expressed his surprise about being considered anti-business. Frankly, when business groups that usually support heavier regulation (because they are composed of established companies that want to limit competition) are expressing concern about your policies’ effects on business, you should admit you’re anti-business.

After the interview was technically finished, Obama briefly attempted to galvanize his disheartened supporters and admonished, “If people want to take their ball and go home, that tells me folks weren’t serious in the first place.”

I know he didn’t mean that, but if the man who waged an almost detail-free campaign centered around the vague concepts of hope and change were honest with himself, I think he’d realize he stated the fact quite accurately.


E-mail: jarlower@indiana.edu