Step 1: Construct a neurotic personalized fantasy of Barack Obama. Step 2...

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

Think locally. Act Globally.

Step 1: Construct a neurotic personalized fantasy of Barack Obama that is fundamentally about your personal psychological issues
Step 2: Blame everyone else in the world for the defects and inconsistencies of your interior psychodrama

__________

In reality, Barack Obama ran on whatever he thought would win as an essential first step toward his real ambition, which is to be a good president.

The man has no great interest in ideology, or even policy. He is interested in politics and governance.

He thinks he can be a better sort of president. That's his bag.

He's not a policy wonk. (He understands policy, but the fine print doesn't drive him.) He has no over-arching revolutionary idea of foreign policy. (Unlike the Chimp, who does.)

He is a visionary in terms of politics, management and leadership. And perhaps that is what is best for the country because this is, for good or ill, a democracy. (Product is process, form follows function, etc.)

I think he will be an excellent president. A remarkable president.

Because his ONLY interest is that things work well.

These dope-dreams about the vast conspiracy that is forcing Hillary, or Summers, or Gates or Rahm or whoever on Obama are low comedy.

Obama's role model is Reagan, not FDR. Not ideologically, of course, but in terms of national symbolism and management style. Carter and Clinton are brilliant men who micro-managed. Reagan was a dope who was shrewd enough to delegate.

Obama is a brilliant man who is brilliant enough to not want to repeat the micro-managing errors of his brilliant predecessors. "What if Reagan had been smart and good?" "What if Clinton had been secure enough to be more decisive?"

The idea of a brilliant president who is not intellectually vain has a lot going for it.

The concept of making Hillary SOS and Rahm COS is the same as Reagan turning much of the government over to Bush campaign manager James Baker. Baker knew what the fuck was going on.

Obama's gig isn't that the Clinton presidency was immoral. His gig is that it was ineffective. "I could have enacted Bill Clinton's policies better than he did, without the drama and scandal and partisan warfare."

During the primaries and election Obama said what had to be said to get people to vote for him... same as everyone else. That's how politics works. Nobody older than twelve is supposed to believe that stuff.

And now that he has won his only interest is in being the best president he can be. And that means turn over the nuts and bolts of government to people he believes know what the fuck is going on. The record so far suggests he is a shrewd judge of talent so I have no reason to assume he has a bad idea of who knows what's what.

The "change" Obama has ALWAYS run on is political change as exemplified through a personal, non-idealogical management style.

Folks who think "change" means upheaval just haven't been listening very hard. Obama has never been about dramatic change in policy, foreign or domestic. He's a policy agnostic. That's why he ran on Hillary's policy platform in the primaries. He never said, "I will do something different" (except to those desperate to hear that.) He said, I can do Hillary's policies better than she can.

And he's probably right.

It wouldn't have ever crossed my mind to make Hillary SOS, but it seems that Obama has looked at the big picture and decided that American foreign policy will be best managed by Hillary, and that Hillary at SOS aligns Bill CLinton's interests with Obama's, and Bill has a LOT of weight internationally, and Hillary and Biden are generally on the same page, and all the things that go into saying, "this is the best choice for America and for the popular efficacy of my presidency."

So deal with it.

He is a manager and a leader and a political theorist. He will be a great president because he is willing to accept on a deep and meaningful level that some people know more about stuff than he does.

I have never been so confident that an incoming president would make the correct moves.

I am also certain that he will step on one or more of my single-issue moral absolute issues. But that's built into the system. I can only hope he steps on fewer of them than someone else would. (There's a reson I do not fall in love with politicians.)

[Skwmom]

1. So Obama's whole change message was a lie and he isn't qualified to

do the job but he will appoint the people that are.

Thanks for another example of why Hillary as SOS is a TERRIBLE idea.

[EstimatedProphet]

13. Change to what?

What would constitute satisfactory change for you? If Obama builds a team that works, does it really matter so much that Hillary is part of it?

Change means change from the last 8 years. It doesn't mean that Obama take exactly the same attitude that the Bush administration did, and force everyone to his will.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. Barack Obama =Bill Clinton -The Drama

~

[wyldwolf]

6. yeah, I can see that... BUT...

.. to be fair, most of the drama around Clinton was not his doing.

[Abacus]

7. k/r

That's verbatim what I've been explaining to my father who is/was convinced that Obama is a Marxist. I said that Obama's more likely to be center-left, in the style of Clinton but without the drama.

[crispini]

3. No, I really think you do the man a disservice when you compare him to Reagan.

Reagan may have been a visionary, but he was absolutely 0% wonk, and he really did sort of just say "THATAWAY" and expect everyone to follow his lead.

Obama is MUCH more of a wonk. Look at what he reads. Look at how sublimely detail-oriented his campaign was. I agree that Obama is also a visionary, but he's also at least 50% wonk. I'm quite sure he has a LOT of ideas about how to get things done.

I guess I'm sort of half agreeing with you, but I think you're aim is just a little bit off. I do think Obama is above ideology in that sense, and I do think he's, at heart, a sublimely practical person. But I also get the sense he's got a lot of ideas of his own. I think he's willing to listen to others, but I think Obama's going to surprise us with some stuff. :D

[Terran]

4. I disagree with your base assessment

In reality, Barack Obama ran on whatever he thought would win as an essential first step toward his real ambition, which is to be a good president.

I'm just basing this on what I know of his life story, but anyone who spends years working as a community advocate before considering politics is not that shallow. This man has seen some things that 99.9% of politicans never EVER bother to see. You don't run for President of the USA on just any old message once you've been where he's been. I believe that he really believes in his message, and that doesn't consist of just improving things in place, it means doing some things differently than in the past.

[wyldwolf]

5. I like your post, but have one small difference of opinion

I think he IS a policy wonk. He, perhaps, isn't as deep a thinker on policy as Bill Clinton was. But his writings do show an great understanding and respect for the nitty gritty of policy making.

[BumRushDaShow]

8. I agree partially regarding putting people in who know the landscape

but I disagree that he would essentially be clueless to the dysfunction of past government and abdicate the responsibility of fixing it by turning it over to those who may be bound to repeat the mistakes of the past once more.

I don't see him as a micromanager but I do see him as the lion that he is - he will watch out over the lay of the land from afar, but then when something goes wrong and chaos ensues, he'll roar (in his tightly controlled manner) to settle the ruckus down.

[demwing]

9. I stop listening when people tell me "Deal With It"

Even if they're correct. It reminds me of 2000 and 2004 freeperspew.

[TexasObserver]

10. Nicely done, sir. Co-sign.

[EstimatedProphet]

11. Amazingly well-put. K&R

The Party Commissars posting on DU who isist that everything be extremely liberal/progressive immediately with no regard to the consequences, and who believe that no one in the US is left enough (with the possible exception of Kucinich), and who want ideaological purity in every appointment, would guarantee that in 8 years we would be in the same boat the Repubs are in now. The mistake that the Repubs made isn't that they weren't liberal enough for the country, it was that they were arrogant and forced everything they wanted through government regardless of public opinion. IMO the main reason breath of fresh air is because he's not talking like he intends to force his will on the government, he will instead guide it to the benefit of everyone. Obama will succeed because he will build a team that is capable, not because the team is left enough.

[rvablue]

16. EstimatedProphet....your user name is perfect b/c this comment is spot on

While everyone on DU loves to rail against Bill Clinton as too conservative, his biggest mistake was going to Washington with a lot of "fresh blood" and immediately going after a liberal agenda....which lost us the Congress in '94.

Right now, Obama has got to fix the economy if he wants to be able to have any success in getting anything else done and having the goodwill of the American people behind him. In order to do that and do it quickly, he is going to have to have as many Republicans as he can vote with him on his agenda.

And that is also why I think he is seriously considering Hillary for SoS. Because while the economy is obviously number one, he needs a very high profile and popular (in the world)SoS because there are so many international and foreign policy problems too.

[EstimatedProphet]

18. I agree, and what's more...

Repubs are more party-loyal than Dems. We have to work harder at winning them over than they have to work to win us over. But we still have to work at it, because they're still there.

[noiretextatique]

21. the clinton haters aren't just liberals and progressives

there are dedicated clinton haters who are moderates and centrists.

[cali]

12. I think you're mostly on target, and your OP is well reasoned, but

I suspect that Obama is more ideological than you think. One hint that he is, lies in his comments about Reagan, and wanting to fundamentally change the trajectory of the country, as Reagan did.

[Occam Bandage]

14. Excellent. K, R, and the like.

[BootinUp]

15. "nobody older than twelve..." lol

[Lilith Velkor]

24. Leaves out about half this board, eh?

[apnu]

17. You summed up my thoughts better than I could.

"Change" is about getting our broken system to work. And that is above differences in party or philosophy. Anybody who thinks otherwise hasn't been paying attention.

[Magrittes Pipe]

19. Reccomended.

:thumbsup:

[pnorman]

20. "The idea of a brilliant president who is not intellectually vain has a lot going for it."

That part I can fully agree with, and I expect most others here do also. As for the rest, I'll study it carefully, along with the other postings in this thread.

pnorman

[enigmatic]

22. yep

:thumbsup:

[Lilith Velkor]

23. "I could have enacted BC's policies better than he did, w/o the drama, scandal & partisan warfare."

Is that a direct quote?

If so, Barack is not so very smart after all. :scared:

[anonymous171]

25. Yep. After 8 years of an ideologue in charge of Washington, we need a shrewd pragmatist.

That's why I voted for him after all.

[DeepModem Mom]

26. Very interesting. K&R