Robert Gibbs loses his cool, lashes out at "professional" left in interview

Somebody sure seems grouchy:

During an interview with The Hill in his West Wing office, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs blasted liberal naysayers, whom he said would never regard anything the president did as good enough.

“I hear these people saying he’s like George Bush. Those people ought to be drug tested,” Gibbs said. “I mean, it’s crazy.”

The press secretary dismissed the “professional left” in terms very similar to those used by their opponents on the ideological right, saying, “They will be satisfied when we have Canadian healthcare and we’ve eliminated the Pentagon. That’s not reality.”

Of those who complain that Obama caved to centrists on issues such as healthcare reform, Gibbs said: “They wouldn’t be satisfied if Dennis Kucinich was president.”

It's not so unusual for a "senior administration official" to vent in front of a reporter... it's happened many times before.

But a press secretary letting loose — on the record — against the very people who have personally invested the most in helping his boss try to raise America's quality of life? That's much rarer.

Who exactly is Gibbs angry at? What set him off? The original article didn't say, but in a statement Gibbs sent out to certain members of the White House press corps, he hints that it was a segment on Dylan Ratigan's MSNBC show. Which makes his comments all the more bizarre, because Ratigan isn't a liberal.

A skilled press secretary is supposed to be diplomatic and tactful, and be able to keep his or her cool even while feeling stressed. It's a tough job. But it's a job that Robert Gibbs accepted nonetheless. He is doing Barack Obama no service by publicly bashing people who work in progressive politics for a living. What is so criminal about wanting this administration to be more effective?

I expect stereotypes and straw men attacks from the right wing. I don't expect to see such silliness attributed in a newspaper to somebody who has the heavy responsibility of speaking for the President of the United States.

I don't know any progressives who think Barack Obama is "like George Bush". There are many activists and commentators who have criticized the President for continuing the foreign occupations that were begun under Bush. I am one of them. I don't believe we belong in Afghanistan or Iraq. That does not mean I equate our president with his predecessor. Barack Obama inherited a huge mess when he was sworn into office, which has been difficult to clean up, partly because the party responsible has done everything it can to get in the way.

That said, I think the administration has made quite a few mistakes. For example, wasting time trying to negotiate with Republicans when it was obvious from the beginning that they were not interested in helping to govern the country.

Or choosing to focus on healthcare reform when it would have been better to push legislation addressing unemployment and the excesses of Wall Street first.

Or proposing half measures as the starting point for priority legislation, and then allowing bills to be watered down to quarter measures.

The list of minor strategic errors and tactical blunders has gotten long. Unfortunately, it adds up to a lot. I think many of these mistakes could have been avoided if the President had different people advising him. I'm not a fan of the folks Barack Obama has surrounded himself with in the Executive Office of the President. I think the Cabinet was remarkably well assembled (with the exception of Timothy Geithner) but I'm just not impressed with the EOP.

This article in The Hill certainly indicates that Robert Gibbs is fatigued, and needs a breather. It's time for him to go. Not because of what he said — I and others can forgive him for that — but because he seems to be fatigued, and the President needs a press secretary who can think before he opens his mouth. It would be better for Gibbs to depart now, before autumn arrives, so that a successor can get acquainted with the job in advance of the midterms' home stretch.

And incidentally, the President's popularity with self-described liberals who live outside the Beltway (which the White House is using to bolster its argument that we should all be grateful for what's been accomplished) is irrelevant.

What is relevant is whether the people who voted for Barack Obama in the last election are enthused enough to turn out and help Democrats beat back the Republicans again. Surveys have shown that young voters and first time voters are not particularly excited about the midterms, which is a serious problem.

The White House doesn't seem as concerned enough about this problem as they ought to be. What's a better use of time and energy: Lashing out at people who have strongly-worded constructive criticism to offer, or by doing something productive with that negative energy? Obviously, it's the latter.

Every time I start to feel dejected or angry about the lousy situation we're in as a state, as a region, as a country, as a species, I counsel myself not to react by whining, complaining, or burning bridges. It won't do me or anyone else much good. What I am accomplishing if I'm spending all my time grousing about this or that? I'm an activist first and foremost, not a commentator. A doer, not a talker.

I'd rather organize than write a blog post. I'd rather build infrastructure than bemoan the lack of it. And I'd rather take on a tough challenge early, because there's nothing to be gained by procrastinating and dithering.

It's hard not to burn out. It's hard to sustain one's motivation, year after year, election cycle after election cycle. It's hard to be a team player when others expect your cooperation but don't return the favor.

But we become stronger by overcoming such obstacles.

I've said what I wanted to say in response to Robert Gibbs' "inartful" comments, and I don't intend to dwell on it further. If Gibbs is truly loyal to the man he works for, he'll be honest with himself about his limits, and tender his resignation if he's used up all of his stamina, as I suspect he has.

We all need recharging at some point, but there are some jobs out there that don't really permit a person to recharge. I would submit that serving as Press Secretary for the most powerful guy in the world is one of those jobs. It's hardly uncommon for a press secretary to only serve for a year or two, and then move on.

And moving on is precisely what anybody who feels like Gibbs' remarks were targeted at them needs to do too. This is no time for a circular firing squad.