Saturday, September 08, 2012

US: CHIEF OF STAFF

Agreed that he took charge at a time when the economy was struggling and that he was faced with an ambitious agenda (that of pushing through key reforms as promised by Obama in his Presidential campaigns which emphasised on Hope and Change). The hard-charging, high octane, arm twister Rahm, an enforcer who had a reputation of getting things done, was entrusted with the job of the White House’s Chief of Staff for steamrolling the change Obama planned. And Rahm – or Rahmbo, as he started getting nomenclatured came to be better known as being a foul-mouthed showman and backroom infighter, who managed, mauled and massacred dissent by standing on tables and screaming; of late even being viewed by many party activists as an instigator of a feud that was dividing the party.

Things went awry in August 2009, when Rahm, in one of his weekly strategy session featuring Liberal groups and other aides (who were planning to air ads attacking conservative Democrats who were balking at Obama’s healthcare overhaul), was back to what he was best known for. He responded to the criticisms by calling the liberal activists as “F***ing retarded.” Although that particular instance was not the sole reason, that presumably was the tipping point, where members got push converted to shove and demanded a port of departure call on Rahm’s war-carrier. David Weigel, Political commentator at Slate, based in Chicago, had this to say to B&E, “After nearly two years of Rahm Emanuel, liberals are pretty much confident that he was a paper tiger, a drudge who never missed an opportunity to undermine the progressive agenda and a man whose alleged formidability never rendered to big, substantive triumphs over Republicans.”

My favourite vaudeville performer Will Rogers once said, “There are two theories to arguin’ with a woman. Neither one works.” You could say that while arguing with Rahm too, where thanks purely to Rahm’s whimsical and fanciful style of debating and arguing, the President had a roller-coaster ride in the White House in the last 20 months. Be it Rahm’s crossing swords with Nancy Pelosi (speaker of the House of Representatives), or his failure to press home the President’s political message in the way Obama wished, or his handling of the economy and Wall Street regulation, Rahm’s pugilistic approach was solely blamed by commentators for delivering defeat. The President needed a Chief of Staff who had the wisdom to help him chart out a bold and progressive path. Someone who could successfully play the role of the President’s gatekeeper, like what James Baker did for Ronald Reagan. Rahm (who also doubled up as the President’s top political adviser and legislative strategist) at least did the gatekeeper part pretty well. But given that the mid-term elections in November would be a bloodbath for Democrats (in all probability, the elections could transfer the control of the House and even the Senate from Democrats to the Republicans), Rahm’s exit was strategically planned to minimise losses. Simply put, this is the return of favour that has been meted out to Rahm for the mistake he committed of pushing Obama too far to the middle.


Source : IIPM Editorial, 2012.
For More IIPM Info, Visit below mentioned IIPM articles.
 
IIPM : The B-School with a Human Face