Barack Obama
Related: About this forumObama, Explained
Meant to post this here, but must have been in 'Good Reads'. Anyway, I have not read this yet, so any opinions will be welcome. I do like James Fallows though. Oh, and it's rather long, but all at the link.
Obama, Explained
As Barack Obama contends for a second term in office, two conflicting narratives of his presidency have emerged. Is he a skillful political player and policy visionarya chess master who always sees several moves ahead of his opponents (and of the punditocracy)? Or is he politically clumsy and out of his deptha pawn overwhelmed by events, at the mercy of a second-rate staff and of the Republicans? Here, a longtime analyst of the presidency takes the measure of our 44th president, with a view to history.
By James Fallows
In the late 1990s, when his fellow University of Chicago professor Barack Obama had just run for the Illinois State Senate and long before a newly inaugurated President Obama named him to his Council of Economic Advisers, the economist Austan Goolsbee was on the most terrifying airplane trip of his life. He was traveling on Southwest Airlines from St. Louis back to Chicagos Midway Airport. The plane got into a thunderstorm, and for a while many passengers thought they were doomed.
One jolt of turbulence was so strong that a flight attendant, not yet strapped in, hit her head on the airplanes ceiling. After another sudden drop, the lights went out on one side of the cabin. The violent ups and downs kept getting worse. Two rows ahead of Goolsbee, a professional-looking woman in her 50s began wailing, Were going to die! Were all going to die! Everyone was looking around and on the border of panic, Goolsbee told me recently. I was kind of wishing someone would start yelling, No, were all not going to die!
At last the plane made it safely to Midway. As passengers filed off, Goolsbee spoke with a strapping young man who had been sitting, ashen but stoic and silent, in a window seat next to the woman whose nerves had broken. He was a high-school football player coming to Chicago on a college recruiting trip. Quite a flight, Goolsbee said to him. This is my first time on an airplane, the young man replied. Are they always like that? I can see why people dont like to fly.
Goolsbees punch line to the story is that during his two years in Washington, I was that kid. He and his colleagues were trying to devise policies to cope with the worst worldwide economic crisis in living memory, in the most contentious political environment in nearly as long a time. He would ask himself, Is it always like this? He could see why people didnt like politics and government.
But when I heard the story, my thoughts turned immediately in another direction. Goolsbee may have felt like that kid, but to most of the world, the more obvious comparison would be to the man who hired Goolsbee, Barack Obama. Four years after being sworn in as a freshman senator, occupying a position of executive authority for the first time in his life, Obama was, at age 47, instantly responsible for guiding the worlds superpower and its allies through an emergency that had left far more experienced leaders wailing the political and financial equivalent of Were all going to die!
lots more...
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1969/12/obama-explained/8874/?single_page=true
Surya Gayatri
(15,445 posts)Seems to be an exhaustively thorough character study.
Thanks for posting, bab.
SG
Whisp
(24,096 posts)will do that.
boxman15
(1,033 posts)The article examines the two different conflicting storylines about Obama: that he's an eleven dimensional political chess-master and that he is a political dunce who is getting his ass kicked. He examines the different aspects of Obama's presidency thus far, his highs, his lows, and examines the proof of each storyline. And the truth is, Obama at times has been a political genius (and his 2012 campaign may prove that), and at other times he has been far too timid, perhaps even naive, too relaint on Clinton-era advisors, and has gotten it handed to him by the GOP.
What really strikes me though, is the historical parallels he draws. There are so many, I won't go over them all, obviously, but the parallels between Truman heading into 1948 and Obama heading into 2012 are uncanny. It really puts a lot of things into perspective.
He ends by saying, as he was talking about throughout the article, that should Obama lose, he will be remembered as a huge disappointment, a political accident that was supposed to bridge the divide and solve our problems, yet failing miserably because he was not ready and was not right as president. His achievements will be undone or marginalized and American politics will continue to lurch rightward.
But if he wins, history will likely judge him as a huge success (though not as huge a success as some of his most ardent supporters hoped for in 2008). He'll be regarded as a successful politician domestically, always keeping perspective amid a ridiculously partisan Congress and as a very successful foreign policy president. Much like FDR and Reagan, his policies will lay the basis for the next generation of American politics. American politics will move to the left and health care reform will eventually be seen in the same light as Medicare or Social Security: untouchable. He'll be seen as a transformative figure and will be compared to FDR and LBJ in terms of policy success.
After reading this, I have a greater appreciation for what Obama has accomplished and a deeper understanding of what has led into his failures. And I'm pumped for November.
babylonsister
(171,102 posts)yesterday, but now I NEED to read this!
Lugnut
(9,791 posts)Cha
(297,810 posts)I shall read it. But, I already know from living part of his history that he's brilliant and he will win that second term and our country will win in the process. Exciting stuff!
nofurylike
(8,775 posts)as much as i flinch at pundits' perpetually framing in the most critical possible light - especially that crap about his being cold ... while people SWOON at his kind, WARM, loving attentions! - the last sentence pretty much redeems this piece, imho.
spoiler alert!
"And for those who supported him the first time, as I did? To me, the evidence suggests that given a second term, he would have a better chance of becoming the figure so many people imagined."
and it is an important piece, because so many will take it to heart. so, thank you, again!
dennis4868
(9,774 posts)but I hated the article...does not give Obama enough credit for the things he has done that is helping millions of Americans (domestic policies) and does not go into enough his foreign policy successes....also, Obama is not lucky. What utter crazyness! Plus, it seems as though he blames Obama for not being ready for the office...what person is ready to take on 2 wars and the worse economic conditions in 60 years. Plus, CBO underestimated the economic conditions in 2009 and Obama relied on that when making policy. Can't blame Obama for that. Nobody knew really how bad things were. This article is terrible.