The midterm election postmortems have produced a lot of bad punditry, but none of it more maddeningly obtuse than the claim that Obama didn't "focus" on jobs. The concept of presidential focus is inscrutable, invisible. It's like criticizing an athlete's intangibles -- easy to do, because nobody can prove otherwise. But what are the critics of the president's perceived attention actually talking about? What do they want?
Paul Krugman shares the frustration:
Are people who say that Mr. Obama should have focused on the economy saying that he should have pursued a bigger stimulus package? Are they saying that he should have taken a tougher line with the banks? If not, what are they saying? That he should have walked around with furrowed brow muttering, "I'm focused, I'm focused"?
Mr. Obama's problem wasn't lack of focus; it was lack of audacity. At the start of his administration he settled for an economic plan that was far too weak. He compounded this original sin both by pretending that everything was on track and by adopting the rhetoric of his enemies.
Read the full story at New York Times.
We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to firstname.lastname@example.org.