This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/29/opinion/bipartisan-summit-houston-obama-baker.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
A Wistful Bipartisan Summit in Houston Barack Obama Joins James Baker at a Wistful Bipartisan Summit
(1 day later)
HOUSTON — They sat on the stage in high-backed leather chairs, like kings of a lost world, and maybe they were. On Tuesday night, James Baker celebrated the 25th anniversary of his namesake think tank at Houston’s Rice University by inviting the 44th president of the United States over for a black-tie chat, with the presidential historian of choice Jon Meacham as a respectful if extraneous moderator.HOUSTON — They sat on the stage in high-backed leather chairs, like kings of a lost world, and maybe they were. On Tuesday night, James Baker celebrated the 25th anniversary of his namesake think tank at Houston’s Rice University by inviting the 44th president of the United States over for a black-tie chat, with the presidential historian of choice Jon Meacham as a respectful if extraneous moderator.
The weather gods smiled on Houston with barely chill breezes during the cocktail hour, and the 1,000 or so invitation-only guests tried hard not to look like the lucky stiffs they knew they were as they filed into the Baker Institute’s tented piazza for dinner.The weather gods smiled on Houston with barely chill breezes during the cocktail hour, and the 1,000 or so invitation-only guests tried hard not to look like the lucky stiffs they knew they were as they filed into the Baker Institute’s tented piazza for dinner.
The lavish if understated table arrangements hit just the right note, what with the mixture of orchids and tulips and natives, along with, perhaps fittingly, amnesia roses. The old but new Texas menu was scrumptious too: medallions of prime, aged beef tenderloin with Zinfandel glacé and horseradish basil sour cream paired perfectly with the jalapeño grits soufflé. And, the champagne was really, really good. It wasn’t surprising that this crowd had repaid the honor of their presence with a tally of $5.4 million in donations to the Baker Institute. The lavish if understated table arrangements hit just the right note, what with the mixture of orchids and tulips and natives, along with, perhaps fittingly, amnesia roses. The old but new Texas menu was scrumptious too: medallions of prime, aged beef tenderloin with zinfandel glacé and horseradish basil sour cream paired perfectly with the jalapeño grits soufflé. And, the champagne was really, really good. It wasn’t surprising that this crowd had repaid the honor of their presence with a tally of $5.4 million in donations to the Baker Institute.
It was cozy and warm inside the tent, and not just because of the temperature: This was a bipartisan crowd of older and younger Bushies and big-ticket Obama backers, many of whom had known one another for ages and had managed to go along to get along, despite a few hitches during the “43” years.It was cozy and warm inside the tent, and not just because of the temperature: This was a bipartisan crowd of older and younger Bushies and big-ticket Obama backers, many of whom had known one another for ages and had managed to go along to get along, despite a few hitches during the “43” years.
But despite all, the hint of a very chilly winter was in the air. Baker is still sharp at 88, and Barack Obama, though graying at the temples after eight years in office, is a mere 57, but you couldn’t help feeling that the current climate — the metaphorical one — had left them, and their audience of political moderates, out in the cold. But despite all, the hint of a very chilly winter was in the air. Mr. Baker is still sharp at 88, and Barack Obama, though graying at the temples after eight years in office, is a mere 57, but you couldn’t help feeling that the current climate — the metaphorical one — had left them, and their audience of political moderates, out in the cold.
The contrast with the current administration was impossible to ignore. There was pointed observation from the dais that two men from different political parties could “reach across the aisle” and have a civil discussion. There was all that erudition: three people on a stage who could discuss the post-World War II order with … actual facts and institutional knowledge. F.D.R.? Harry Truman? George Marshall? Seriously?The contrast with the current administration was impossible to ignore. There was pointed observation from the dais that two men from different political parties could “reach across the aisle” and have a civil discussion. There was all that erudition: three people on a stage who could discuss the post-World War II order with … actual facts and institutional knowledge. F.D.R.? Harry Truman? George Marshall? Seriously?
And there was an abundance of good manners. Meacham slipped only once, referring to you-know-who as “Voldemort.” Baker noted that the 1986 Tax Reform Act he helped President Reagan pass with the aid of the House speaker, Tip O’Neil — you remember him, right? — was “revenue neutral” — which did not add gazillions of dollars to the deficit. And there was an abundance of good manners. Mr. Meacham slipped only once, referring to you-know-who as “Voldemort.” Mr. Baker noted that the 1986 Tax Reform Act he helped Ronald Reagan pass with the aid of the House speaker, Tip O’Neill — you remember him, right? — was “revenue neutral” — which did not add gazillions of dollars to the deficit.
Obama mentioned that, “Not only did I not get indicted, nobody in my administration got indicted.” It was a little like listening to your grandpa and your dad reminisce about the good old days. Mr. Obama mentioned that “not only did I not get indicted, nobody in my administration got indicted.” It was a little like listening to your grandpa and your dad reminisce about the good old days.
Still, it was clear that both men had been trying like hell to figure out Where We Went Wrong, how the world they had built was now broken in two, and the country they had tried so hard to strengthen had, just a day before, tear-gassed women and children to keep them from entering the United States via our southern border.Still, it was clear that both men had been trying like hell to figure out Where We Went Wrong, how the world they had built was now broken in two, and the country they had tried so hard to strengthen had, just a day before, tear-gassed women and children to keep them from entering the United States via our southern border.
Baker, the ultimate, indefatigable pol, was more inclined toward political failings: our representatives don’t live in DC anymore or socialize with one another; gerrymandering, which guaranteed safe districts for members of both parties; the media. “Divisiveness sells. Comity doesn’t.” Mr. Baker, the ultimate, indefatigable pol, was more inclined toward political failings: Our representatives don’t live in Washington anymore or socialize with one another; gerrymandering, which guaranteed safe districts for members of both parties; the media. “Divisiveness sells. Comity doesn’t.”
Obama, being Obama, took a deeper cut. He, too, decried the perpetual campaign, the gerrymandering and the destructiveness of the dysfunction in Washington, which, he said, doesn’t just weaken our influence globally, “It ramps up disorder all over the world.” He was clearly trying out themes on the road for his next book; the word “consensus” came up a lot, as in that historical consensus that had supposedly kept us together since World War II but wasn’t working so well anymore. Mr. Obama, being himself, took a deeper cut. He, too, decried the perpetual campaign, the gerrymandering and the destructiveness of the dysfunction in Washington, which, he said, doesn’t just weaken our influence globally, “It ramps up disorder all over the world.” He was clearly trying out themes on the road for his next book; the word “consensus” came up a lot, as in that historical consensus that had supposedly kept us together since World War II but wasn’t working so well anymore.
More willing to point the finger inward, Obama indicated that the economic differences between urban and rural folks in the United States created divisions that had gone unacknowledged for too long, as had the fault line of race (“Identity politics,” he pointed out, “started with Jim Crow.”) And then there was the gender issue: In the past, “There weren’t any women [in Congress] to say what you guys are doing is stupid.” More willing to point the finger inward, Mr. Obama indicated that the economic differences between urban and rural folks in the United States created divisions that had gone unacknowledged for too long, as had the fault line of race. (“Identity politics,” he pointed out, “started with Jim Crow.”) And then there was the gender issue: In the past, “there weren’t any women to say what you guys are doing is stupid,” he said, referring to Congress.”
That got a big laugh, and the one-hour discussion earned a respectful standing ovation. This wasn’t a foot-stomping, war-whooping crowd. The hour was late, and people were rushing for their cars, anxious to find their way home in the darkness.That got a big laugh, and the one-hour discussion earned a respectful standing ovation. This wasn’t a foot-stomping, war-whooping crowd. The hour was late, and people were rushing for their cars, anxious to find their way home in the darkness.
Mimi Swartz, an executive editor at Texas Monthly, is a contributing opinion writer.Mimi Swartz, an executive editor at Texas Monthly, is a contributing opinion writer.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.