ORGANIZED FOR SUCCESS?
I'm looking for signs that the Administration is adequately staffed and organized for the massive economic challenges.
Are you feeling it?
I mean, John Harwood is reporting that Geithner doesn't even have many of his deputies confirmed yet. Is that true?
Do they realize that a radical restructuring of economic life in America is on the table, that the "fierce urgency of now" is now piercing them like a sword, in need of immediate attention? Or will they only understand, in reverse, looking back ... wishing about what they had done?
The last thing they want is events to be moving faster than they can handle or seem prepared for. With $60 billion dollar loss from AIG reportedly looming, that appears to be happening.Are there 20 people at Treasury assigned to AIG? If not, why not?
Is the contingency plan for this bankruptcy-event ready? If not, why not?
Has Ben Bernanke "solved" the too-big-to-fail issues, to the point that he is working with Congressional leaders to get new 'authorities' by the end of this month? If not, why not?
Do they really understand - really - that the GOP has already taken out a cheap calling card for getting their fiscal mojo back in four years or more, by voting down the Obama stimulus?
Even more important, do they realize that a radical restructuring of economic life in America is on the table, that the "fierce urgency of now" is now piercing them like a sword, in need of immediate attention? Or will they only understand, in reverse, looking back ...?
MORE EVIDENCE OF ABSENCE
I read Paul Krugman. He says that Treasury spent time going down the wrong path on the 'bank fix' proposal, and that is maybe why the final result lacked detail.
My question is why didn't they have enough staff to produce three or four viable approaches? How can pursuing "one path" be deleterious?
BUILDING CONFIDENCE
I hear Chris Matthews saying that Obama's team need to generate confidence. Jim Cramer is fine with pushing Obama under a bus, so why listen to him?
The truth is they are not going to have confidence. At this late stage in the crisis, only facts-on-the-ground will work.
They need to define plans with sound economic and progressive values and push them through.
OBAMA SHOULD GO NUCLEAR
If Obama had the kind of legislative foresight and insight that FDR had, I'd suggest he "go nuclear", in order to set a firm, clear direction.
As the situation continues to deteriorate - and it will - people will increasingly be looking for a strong leader, not someone who is getting used to the fine food at the White House, joking about helicopters, and continuing to talk about a bi-partisanship that doesn't exist in this country.
