Referendum of the Obama Presidency, Part 2

On January 19, the voters of Massachusetts become representatives of the voters of the United States. At least that's what some would want us to think. In all likelihood, the results of the battle of Scott Brown vs. Martha Coakley will be dissected the same as the gubernatorial elections of Virginia and New Jersey. No matter who wins, the winner's party establishment will boldly state that the voters of America have spoken. So much for the voters of Massachusetts. The losing party will argue that it was a "local' election."

We have seen all this before. CNN's Ed Henry reported in November on the Democratic response.

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs dismissed Democratic electoral defeats in New Jersey and Virginia as "two very local elections" that say nothing about President Obama's standing with the American people right now

Gibbs then pushed the victory of Bill Owens in New York's 23rd Congressional District as having national implications because of the fracture in the GOP. In the game of national politics, such hypocrisy is certainly not surprising. The instant the vote are counted on January 19, the same game of avoiding the blame will surely reign. As an avid supporter of the President's policies, I continue to be disappointed in the failure of Barack Obama's pledge of a "new, more pragmatic approach."

If only I could learn to expect business-as-usual from the President, I probably wouldn't be quite so disappointed come Tuesday.