By Dave Andrusko

Whatever variation of a "12-Step" program someone subscribes to, near the top of the list of action items (if you want to succeed) is to TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR ACTIONS. As the popularity of pro-abortion President Barack Obama slides downwards faster than a downhill skier, many reporters who cleared the way for this inexperienced candidate through the brush of public skepticism are searching for explanations that let Obama off the hook.

Pro-Abortion President Barack Obama

We've talked about this before. Sometimes it's embarrassingly dismissive--Obama is really too good for a finicky electorate--other times it's a variation of you couldn't expect more given the [fill in the blank]. Still other times, we're told, he's such a born compromiser that Obama is caught between the partisan "extremes" of both parties.

The obvious rebuttal is that he is not too good (no one is) for the American people; the time limit for blaming others has expired; and everything about Obama shouts that he is ideologically-driven to change many fundamentals, unnerving a wide swath of the American public. From our single-issue pro-life perspective, we've seen all these behaviors on displayed, symbolized by the pro-abortion, pro-rationing monstrosity known as ObamaCare, even as we were told Obama was "post-partisan" and looking for "common ground."

An article in the New York Times today, written by Matt Bai, offers another excuse in the guise of offering an explanation in "The Paradox of a Legislative President." Obama came into office with BIG plans for BIG Change. But so did other presidents, as Bai quickly points out.

The difference is that his sparse, sparse career (my words) prior to becoming Chief Executive was in the legislature--first in the Illinois state Senate, then in the United States Senate. "Mr. Obama's central strategy was to concentrate on cajoling Democratic lawmakers into passing a series of bills -- the stimulus package, the health care overhaul, a new set of financial regulations," Bai argues. "Rather than spend a lot of time rallying public support for the agenda, Mr. [John] Podesta said, the administration expected to get an 'updraft' from an improving economy; the bet was that, as unemployment came down and consumer confidence rose, public opinion would more or less take care of itself." Of course, the "updraft" has not occurred.

Well, this is awfully convenient. Explaining everything as a reflection of Obama's determination not to get bogged down in the legislative weeds frees Bai from the obvious comeback. Working hand in glove with two pro-abortion Democrats just as partisan as he is--Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Speaker Nancy Pelosi--Obama rammed his programs through without a backward glance at Republican objections and against strong public opposition.

Waiting for an "updraft"? How about instead formulating a bill--in our case ObamaCare--that did not rattle the teeth of countless millions of Americans and run roughshod over the objections of pro-life Americans?

Bai uses the second half of his piece to implicitly suggest that the disaster that Obama (and Democrats) may be facing at the polls in a couple of months could have been averted if only Obama ("whose skills as an explainer were so instrumental in winning the office") had not done so "little sustained explaining of the crisis outside Washington." But, of course, Obama did!

The public simply didn't buy his various rationales, any more than they bought into justifications offered by Reid and Pelosi.

Bai's final point is Obama sold himself as a post-partisan candidate but failed to deliver on that his first 19 months. But this isn't really Obama's fault, it's a function of being a "legislative president." Bai quotes Podesta, "the former White House chief of staff who led Mr. Obama's transition team," who said this is "arguably" what Obama had to do. But it meant "you couldn't deliver on the nonpartisan promise," which has cut deeply into Obama's support among Independents.

You get the drift: Obama couldn't help himself, he was locked into ignoring everyone who disagreed because to do otherwise would mean a legislative death by a thousand cuts. In fact, Obama wanted what he wanted, couldn't care less what pro-lifers or anyone else who disagreed thought.

No wonder his popularity is tumbling downwards toward the 30s.

Please send your comments on Today's News & Views and National Right to Life News Today to daveandrusko@gmail.com. If you like, join those who are following me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/daveha.