Tweet
"It's hard to watch what's going on here," Panetta said at the start of the session, sponsored by The Wall Street Journal. He noted that there are two ways of governing: by leadership or by crisis. "This town has been governing by crisis after crisis after crisis," he said.
Which raised the obvious question: Was he saying something about the president's leadership?
Several observations ensued. "This town has gotten a lot meaner in the last few years." Relationships have deteriorated. Redistricting into safe seats hasn't helped. Neither has the explosion of money in campaigns, or the elimination of earmarks. (Negotiating one Bill Clinton budget, "I think I sold about six bridges to get there," Panetta recalled.)
Then, to Obama. "This president -- he's extremely bright, he's extremely able, he's somebody who I think certainly understands the issues, asks the right questions and I think has the right instincts about what needs to be done for the country."
Next came the "but" -- without a name but with a clear message. "You have to engage in the process. This is a town where it's not enough to feel you've got the right answer. You've got to roll up your sleeves ... listening to other people, figuring out what they need ... that's what governing is all about."
Bloomberg's Al Hunt asked Panetta how Clinton would have handled the current situation differently. "We were negotiating up to the last minute in the Oval Office" before the 1995 shutdown, recalled Panetta, then Clinton's chief of staff. "Some of us were nervous that Bill Clinton was bending over backwards to try to see if he could get a deal done."
Panetta's image of being clustered in the Oval Office with all the key players -- Bob Dole, Newt Gingrich, Dick Armey, Dick Gephardt, Tom Daschle, plus Clinton and Vice President Gore -- offered a vivid contrast to the current state of play, with the talks collapsed between White House and House Speaker John Boehner, and with the 11th-hour action shifted to the Senate leaders, Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell.
To some extent, the reporters in the room seemed more forgiving of the circumstances in which the president finds himself. Jackie Calmes of The New York Times noted that the Panetta-envisioned budget deal was illusory because Republicans were insistent that there be no new tax revenue. Doyle McManus of the Los Angeles Times observed that the White House would argue that its previous efforts at schmoozing and deal-making had gone nowhere.
"Just because you've engaged in some set of negotiations and they haven't gone anywhere, for one reason or another there's been a breakdown, is no reason to walk away from the table," Panetta said. "In this town, you've got to stay with it. You've got to stay at it."
Which raised the obvious question: Was he saying something about the president's leadership?
Several observations ensued. "This town has gotten a lot meaner in the last few years." Relationships have deteriorated. Redistricting into safe seats hasn't helped. Neither has the explosion of money in campaigns, or the elimination of earmarks. (Negotiating one Bill Clinton budget, "I think I sold about six bridges to get there," Panetta recalled.)
Then, to Obama. "This president -- he's extremely bright, he's extremely able, he's somebody who I think certainly understands the issues, asks the right questions and I think has the right instincts about what needs to be done for the country."
Next came the "but" -- without a name but with a clear message. "You have to engage in the process. This is a town where it's not enough to feel you've got the right answer. You've got to roll up your sleeves ... listening to other people, figuring out what they need ... that's what governing is all about."
Bloomberg's Al Hunt asked Panetta how Clinton would have handled the current situation differently. "We were negotiating up to the last minute in the Oval Office" before the 1995 shutdown, recalled Panetta, then Clinton's chief of staff. "Some of us were nervous that Bill Clinton was bending over backwards to try to see if he could get a deal done."
Panetta's image of being clustered in the Oval Office with all the key players -- Bob Dole, Newt Gingrich, Dick Armey, Dick Gephardt, Tom Daschle, plus Clinton and Vice President Gore -- offered a vivid contrast to the current state of play, with the talks collapsed between White House and House Speaker John Boehner, and with the 11th-hour action shifted to the Senate leaders, Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell.
To some extent, the reporters in the room seemed more forgiving of the circumstances in which the president finds himself. Jackie Calmes of The New York Times noted that the Panetta-envisioned budget deal was illusory because Republicans were insistent that there be no new tax revenue. Doyle McManus of the Los Angeles Times observed that the White House would argue that its previous efforts at schmoozing and deal-making had gone nowhere.
"Just because you've engaged in some set of negotiations and they haven't gone anywhere, for one reason or another there's been a breakdown, is no reason to walk away from the table," Panetta said. "In this town, you've got to stay with it. You've got to stay at it."
Comment