Rahm Emanuel and Obama: Blame Game

Is Rahm Emanuel to blame for Obama's disastrous first year in office?

Are Obama's many failures and missteps due to his failure to heed Emanuel's advice?

Jennifer Loven, AP White House Correspondent, relays the weird workings of the Obama White House.

No-drama Obama was bound to get fireworks when he chose the expletive-spewing, hotheaded, never-at-rest Rahm Emanuel to be his White House chief of staff. The only questions were when — and how big.

The answers are now — and pretty large, by inside-the-Beltway standards, anyway.

And they're happening at a particularly unpleasant time in Barack Obama's presidency, which is struggling with problems in terrorist policy, health care reform and other matters that have the president in political hot water and down in the polls.

The strange, only-in-Washington story began unfolding about two weeks ago when a column in The Washington Post asserted that Obama's "first year fell apart in large part because he didn't follow his chief of staff's advice on crucial matters."

The piece advised a 180-degree turn from the recent trend of blaming Emanuel for Obama's woes and of calling for the former congressman from Illinois to go. Instead, it said, blame others in Obama's orbit who are too "in love with the president" to advise him wisely on such things as health care strategy, the closing of the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and how and where to try accused Sept. 11 terrorists. Blame Obama himself for not listening more to Emanuel, columnist Dana Milbank wrote.

Then this week came another Post story saying basically the same thing, based largely on interviews with Democrats on Capitol Hill. This was harder for the White House to shrug off, because it was not an opinion piece but in the news section — on the front page, no less.

Suddenly, the Obama White House had to deal with a narrative that some (though it's still unclear who) think Obama's chief of staff is smarter than the president, an awkward development in Washington's deeply ingrained tradition of aides staying behind the scenes and not upstaging the boss.

At the least, it creates an embarrassment and a distraction at a perilous time. And it belies Obama's own prized no-drama culture, where neither dirty laundry nor disagreements are aired and theatrics aren't tolerated. At worst, it sets in motion a dynamic that could lead to shakeups and further doubts about Obama's leadership.

This all sounds like politics as usual to me. Obama certainly has failed miserably at changing the way things are done in Washington.

Let's face it: Obama is a bad leader. He's had a year to grow into his executive role but he's still very, very shaky at the helm. He seems less presidential now than he did when he was standing at the podium with his goofy "Office of the President-Elect" seal.

Doubts about Obama's leadership are legitimate.

Of course, doubts about Emanuel's tactics and judgment are also legitimate.

...Several current and former White House aides said Emanuel, despite his often passionately delivered opinions, is, once a decision is made, among the most loyal and energetic about making it happen. The president was said to view the spate of stories with a long view, that he and his team would rise — or fall — together and that Emanuel is too valued to cut loose.

Emanuel has been open about harboring political ambitions beyond the White House, specifically to run for Chicago mayor. But Gibbs deemed it unlikely that the chief of staff is feeding the stories himself to protect his reputation from its recent battering, particularly from the Democratic Party's liberal wing, which feels abandoned by Obama on many issues.

"We all give advice to the president on a daily basis," Gibbs said. "The president makes decisions and we move forward. When we move forward, nobody moves forward with more determination than the chief of staff."

Some indications point to the stories being driven by Emanuel loyalists, becoming increasingly upset at the criticism aimed at him lately over Obama's sputtering agenda, say those inside and outside the White House. A large number of Democratic lawmakers, particularly centrists and conservatives, feel a huge debt to Emanuel from his days as chairman of the Democratic campaign committee in 2006, when he played an instrumental role in restoring his party to power after 12 years in the minority.

Many of those same Democrats now fear for their chances in November's midterm congressional elections. As is common at this stage in an election cycle, they are looking for more help from Obama and someone to blame if they lose.

And yet, there is no doubt that Emanuel's own pugnacious, loquacious style is to blame, at least indirectly if not more.

Emanuel is known as a fierce competitor, who strikes back — hard — when hit.

The Dems are really in disarray. They have the presidency, the House, and the Senate, and they've made such a mess. The American people gave them a chance and they've blown it.

It's their mess. They own it.

And those descriptions of Emanuel are too kind.

He's a thug.

...[T]he word is that Emanuel isn't going anywhere. For one thing, he is regarded as essential to shepherd health care reform to a conclusion.

And that, said those close to the White House, is the way out of this mess.

If health care is passed, the bad stories and the finger-pointing stop and Obama moves on to other issues.

If health care fails, there will be more bad stories and finger-pointing — common in times of trouble for any president. And they're likely to be not just about Emanuel, but others in the White House as well.

If health care passes everything is hunky dory for Rahm and Barack.

So what?

Who cares how Obama and Emanuel and their factions are getting along?

Their power struggles don't matter outside the Washington bubble.

What matters is how the country is doing, how the American people are faring.

People out of work or in danger of losing their homes don't care about the White House drama.

The Obama administration is amazingly out of touch.