With the second half of it, anyway. Harry Reid is the kind of Majority Leader who can be pushed around, unless the Senators doing the pushing are threatening something important to Harry Reid. That won't get him reelected, but it has helped make him less effective.

Reid's not a wimp. He's the biggest single reason, for example, that talk of expanding the nuclear power industry in the United States is just talk. You can't have more nuclear power unless you have a repository for nuclear waste; the one we built, at a cost of billions, is in Nevada; it will never open as long as Reid is in the Senate. No one can call Reid a pushover where Yucca Mountain is concerned.

Health care reform, or other major national legislation important to the Obama administration, is another story. Reid not the only reason Democrats haven't made the most of their current majority, but he's been Majority Leader long enough to show the best he's got. Democrats would be wise, even if Reid does get reelected this year, to give someone else a chance.

As to the White House staff, well, I'd make some of the changes some people have suggested if I were in President Obama's place. I'm not. That's the trick here, because it really isn't because of David Axelrod or Rahm Emannuel that the leadership of this administration often seems as if it is more comfortable campaigning than governing. That kind of orientation can only come from the very top.

Obama himself has devoted far more time and effort in his professional life to being a successful candidate than he has to succeeding in government (something that incidentally was also true of the two men who preceeded him in the White House early in their own administrations, as well as of his two rivals for the Democratic Presidential nomination in 2008). That has consequences, and we're seeing some of them now.

don't especially make for successful presidents. Or House majority leaders. Certainly in the rough and tumble of politics these individuals, Obama and Reid, must have learned some survival strategies! They don't, however, appear to be exercising them. The president has been faltering for awhile now hopscotching from one plan to the next leaving Rahm, Reid and Geithner to tie up the loose ends of each. Despite Rahmbo's notoriety as dragon slayer, his affinity for whip and tongue lashing has proved meddlesome rather than mettlesome. Reid can't even count heads, impotent to restrain the blue dogs from severing the majority's body. Geithner seemed a poor choice from the get-go. He wears the air of one perennially dazed and confused. Combined, their continued presence on board has contributed to the public perception of adminstrative inertia in the oval office. Replacing this trio may not be a panacea but it will signal that change is in the ear. Oh, an what about Larry Summers? He should be on the short list, too.

Health care reform, or other major national legislation important to the Obama administration, is another story. Reid not the only reason Democrats haven't made the most of their current majority, but he's been oyun oyna Majority Leader long enough to show the best he's got. Democrats would be wise, even if Reid does get reelected this year, to give someone else a chance.

kral oyun

One that was missed and came as surprise was the first NSC Chief of Staff, Mark Lippert. He went back to his USNAVRES job...sounds like that was not calling, but rather a falling...maybe a falling out with his boss (Did he recognize Jones as his boss? Maybe that was the problem)...lots of rumors so I am suspicious of his hastened exit.

The only change urgently in need is that one of President, and barring that, of the Speaker and Majority Leader. Eric Cantor, for example, would make a great Speaker. And Paul Ryan, too.

How naive can one be to expect success from forcing policies on the unwilling populace?

The problems of this administration are not tactical. They are deeply strategical: what kind of America do we want? An exceptional and providential society or another formerly Great Britain?

This problem cannot be corrected by Reid's departure (if it can be corrected at all). Putting a brass-knuckles partisan like Chuck Schumer at the front of the Senate Democrats IS a recipe for added failure because people are not just rejecting Obama's / Democrats' policies...they are rejecting the Chicago-style tactics in the White House and the arrogant superiority complex of House and Senate Democrat leadership. This is a systemic problem that isn't going to be fixed easily or quickly, if at all. As long as the majority of powerful politicos in D.C. seek power for their own benefit, the Administration's failures will continue. People are disenchanted with this Administration (not me...I always knew it was smoke and mirrors with a snake-oil salesman at the lead) and do not want to see another 3 years of rookie mistakes and serious overreaching by people who consider themselves superior to the rest of the nation. Dumping Harry Reid to save Obama's agenda is like taking cough drop to combat TB.

The voters will make this happen (Reid out) but it won't help Obama. Luce was right in his piece - these guys are great at campaigning but a bust at governing. And why is that? Because they haven't every governed anything larger than a Senate staff. And the other Dems in the primary knew and even said this (including now the now VP) but hoped against hope (pun intended) that things would work out when he got elected.

Reid did that best he could with a bad hand. No leadership from the Prez beyond vague and vacillating (and ultimately ineffective) speeches and totally unrealistic ultra-left pressure from Prime Minister Pelosi.

This whole episode shows the genius of the Founders once again. Major changes in direction take a consensus, not a bare majority. For those who don't like the filibuster now - would they like it a bit more if the GOP is back in the majority and wants to privatize social security, repeal the executive order allowing government workers to unionize, etc.???

The next 2 1/2 years are going to be fun to watch.

"If the Senate had passed every bill the House has already passed and the President had signed into law major healthcare reform and major climate and energy legislation (to pick just two items caught in the Senate logjam), Obama and his team would be hailed for the best opening year since Roosevelt."

This is fatuous. It's like saying "If the Colts had scored more touchdowns than the Saints, they would have won the NFL Championship."

The real issue is why Democrats weren't able to push HCR or cap-and-trade through the Senate. Is it because Reid's incompetent? Maybe. But note that Pelosi was only barely able to push HCR through the House, where Democrats enjoy a clear majority.

Further, it suggests that had the President signed an HCR law, Democrats would not have suffered defeat in Massachusetts (and maybe not in Virginia or NJ). That seems like a stretch to me.

Americans simply don't want your "change". Leave us alone.

If you are suggesting Chuck Schumer. You are either a liberal freak and Jewish, or you know nothing about New York Politics or it's politicians.
Chuck Schumer is a scumbag, plain and simple. This man has been a large reason our state continues to grow it's debt, raise is expenditures, see citizens leave to Connecticut, and hand over control of the government to Unions, who do nothing but see to it that their members can live off other people starting at age 50, (for a job that frankly isn't to impressive). He wasn't even talented enough to get NY paid off for a healthcare vote. Chuck Schumer is an talentless, arrogant, self-important, condescending jerk, and since i was raised in Scarsdale, I know all about it.
Chuck Schumer?? You are a moron.

And as for the password requirements on this website. Give me a break, this isn't the Pentagon. low, medium, high? include an uppercase letter, a punctuation mark, and a number... Get a life. No one cares what anyone's Foriegn Policy magazine account says. Waste of time. Only my hatred for Scumbag, I mean Senator Schummer made me actually go back three times to meet your "password standard requirements" .
Hey Foriegn Policy magazine...Get over yourselves.