hard choices and sacrifice? maybe later...

Syndicated columnist Robert Samuelson takes Obama to task for the "the stimulus package"-- in the C-J...

Samuelson doesn't mention the rhetoric of the Inaugural Address, but probably has it in mind...

President Obama didn't make the tough choices on the stimulus package. He could have either used the program mainly (a) to bolster the economy or (b) to advance a larger political agenda, from energy efficiency to school renovation. But Obama wanted both, and, superficially, the two can be portrayed as an enlightened partnership.

"This is not just a short-term program to boost employment," Obama said recently. "It's one that will invest in our most important priorities like energy and education, health care and a new infrastructure that are necessary to keep us strong and competitive in the 21st Century."

In its releases, the White House gushes superlatives. The stimulus program, says one fact sheet, "launches the most ambitious school modernization program on record," "computerizes every American's health record in five years" and "undertakes the largest weatherization" -- insulation -- "program in history." What a bonanza of good stuff!

Unfortunately, investing in tomorrow won't automatically stimulate the economy today....

The decision by Obama and Democratic congressional leaders to load the stimulus with so many partisan projects is politically shrewd and economically suspect. The President's claims of bipartisanship were mostly a sham, as he skillfully maneuvered Republicans into a no-win position: Either support a Democratic program; or oppose it -- and seem passive and uncaring....

Obama's political strategy fails to address adequately the economy's present needs while also worsening the long-term budget outlook. Some of his "temporary" spending increases in practice will almost certainly become permanent. There were tough choices to be made -- and Obama ducked them all.