Is Obama's Willingness to "Compromise" Fueled by a Deep-Seated Need to be Loved?

[NoodleyAppendage]

I've been wondering over the course of the health care debate/debacle, with President Obama's apparently genuine need to seek a compromise and consensus (on all things), that maybe our leader suffers from deep-seated psychological issues. Even at the State representative level, Obama was known for consensus and compromise and he demonstrated a similar tendency during his brief tenure in the Senate. His campaign rhetoric did not reinforce what his personal/political history should have warned us about. Therein, lies the frustration of the grassroots. We were sold a man of sweeping change during the election and now we have the "real" Obama, who's need for compromise/consensus is the antithesis of what would be required of a person of sweeping social change. I believe that Obama's default position suggests a psychological need for acceptance.

So, what's behind Obama's need for acceptance. The reasons are myriad, but I suspect that the general absence of his father and his growing up in a predominantly white social circle are two big factors. In some ways, Obama and Bush are alike. Both have father "issues," though the latter rebelled against his in a huge way, while the former seeks the approval of others as a way to revive that which was denied of him during his formative years.

J

[RagAss]

1. No.

[NoodleyAppendage]

3. Thanks for the enlightening counterpoint argument. n/t

J

[RagAss]

46. Reading some of these other replies.....uhhhh....You're Welcome.

[villager]

2. we really, really need to start electing Presidents without "daddy issues"

I think they've all had them since Reagan.

Hell, maybe they all have them -- is that what propels them toward office?

[NoodleyAppendage]

6. I don't think it applies to all politicians. Narcissism fuels most, which I don't think is Obama's.

I don't think Obama is a narcissist, which is the psychological poison of most politicians.

J

[EFerrari]

29. Lincoln and FDR had them, too.

[villager]

36. I guess they stopped worrying about trying to please their phantom daddies

..unlike most of the other Presidents we're saddled with.

[EFerrari]

39. FDR and to an extent Lincoln were "traitors" to their class.

Obama doesn't suffer from that problem apparently.

[villager]

41. Evidently not....

So I guess the over-class can rest all too easily...

[anonymous171]

64. If FDR had not married Eleanor or lost his mobility, then he would have probably ended up like Obama

Getting thrown out of the privileged boys club has different effects on different people I guess. Some people strive to regain that approval while others simply say "Fuck you" to the elite and find their own way. Obama chose the sycophant route.

[dkf]

4. He thought he could sway consensus his way and that would be the vehicle for change

Birthers were nowhere on his horizon.

[NoodleyAppendage]

8. Then he is guilty of naivete. n/t

J

[polpilot]

68. Yup...just not too clever.

[Mari333]

5. he is just part of a system that is so corrupt

that he sold out . that is all. I think he is clueless.
the whole system has to change. Cornel West called him on it.
I have personally given up on it all.

[Individualist]

7. No

It's fueled by his deep-seated affiliation with NDC/DLC.

"I am a New Democrat"---Obama
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7834083&mesg_id=7835413

[Bluebear]

12. ouch :)

[laughingliberal]

13. Bingo! nt

[Echo In Light]

9. No

[Captain Hilts]

10. Yes. He's not as needy as Bill Clinton, but he's on the same spectrum. nt

[havocmom]

11. No, it probably comes from finding out the president is not the power

The president is pretty much a hostage

[Florida Blue]

14. Does he have abandonment issues. Gawd

I can't believe I even used those words.

[babylonsister]

15. Ugh. Now I've read it all. Your attempt at amateur psychology is

a fail.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x162791
snip//

I keep hearing from Democrats who say the President lacks courage, who ask why he bothers to speak to Republicans, and who cry out for him to wield his majority as a weapon against the GOP. Apparently he should march to Capital Hill, armed with tens of thousands of progressive blogs and tweets and demand a single payer health care system.

President Obama is modeling a different kind of democratic engagement. It is a model he adhered to during the election and he continues to follow it now. President Obama refuses to believe that we can have a functioning democracy if the majority refuses to speak to the minority. He takes seriously his responsibility to govern in the interest of both his supporters and his opponents. He remains committed to the possibility that he and his Party may not always be in sole possession of good ideas.

[NoodleyAppendage]

23. I'm not an amateur. Thanks for not addressing the point, which us your fail. n/t

Ph.D. here in clinical psych and Ivy League postdocs at Yale and Brown, thank you.

[babylonsister]

32. I did adress the point, from someone who is a lot more knowledgeable

and familiar with Obama than I am.

And bully for you and your degrees; I still think you're barking up the wrong tree.

[NoodleyAppendage]

38. We are products of our environment and experiences.

Obama is not immune to psychological motivations. No one has that gift.

J

[Cosmocat]

47. I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night ...

beyond my masters degree and 15 years in counseling, and I can say the OP was near worthless ...

He wants to be liked?

Jesus ...

I got news for you skippy, it isn't some personal psychodrama, the man simply knows the politics of the country is splitting the middle to get things done ... Ain't nothing more than simple, objective analysis and action toward getting shiite down ...

As an aside, post docs or not, you swung and missed on your personality analysis ... BO KNOWS he if good and KNOWS he is liked ... He also is smart enough to know the Rs are going to hate him regardless of how much he tacts that direction ...

[NoodleyAppendage]

51. Sounds like someone is pissed they couldn't get in or hack a Ph.D. program.

Must be tough.

J

[tallahasseedem]

57. Are you published?

There are many that don't pursue anything beyond a Masters degree unless they're planning on becoming a university professor or advanced level researcher.

[NoodleyAppendage]

60. Yes. 20 articles and counting. n/t

J

[tallahasseedem]

61. I highly doubt that...

20 is too convenient a number. But hey, in anonymous internet world you can be anything/anyone you want.

[NoodleyAppendage]

70. Whatever. 20 is the research. I didn't count the 1 review article, nor the 3 book chapters.

I don't need to prove myself to you anyway.

J

[Cosmocat]

108. yeah ...

I'm jealous of you, that is it ...

You're the one who started patting yourself on the back over your "credentials ..."

Either way, you are wrong, on every level ...

[tallahasseedem]

52. LOL!

It cracks me up when people on message boards try to one up another poster with their "supposed" academic credentials. I have an advanced degree and can say that no one I have ever debated on any issue has followed their argument with a curriculam vitae. Talk about daddy issues.

[Number23]

107. "Ph.D. here in clinical psych and Ivy League postdocs at Yale and Brown"

You wuz robbed...

[Ozymanithrax]

16. Could Obama's willingness to compromise be a desire to get things done?

Yes, I know it is unpopular to try and find consensus, but it is a legitimate way to solve problems.

I also understand that Republicans are not willing to compromise and do not seek consensus, but that doesn't mean that we should not try.

Bush, Republicans, and conservatives never sought consensus and never accepted compromise. Those traits were not admired here on the left. Why is refusing to seek consensus and a refusal to compromise such a wonderful trait for we Democrats?

And as for the Freudian psychoanalysis? Shouldn't you also have discussed the oedipal urges in President Bush a President Obama to give a complete psychological profile. Do these men want to bang their mothers and kill their fathers, also?

[Bluebear]

18. What problems have been solved so far with all this consensus? Seious inquiry.

[Ozymanithrax]

20. Well, we are close to reforming health care.

It took a while, but it will get done.

Obama has managed to stop the gushing blood from the critical wounds inflicted by Republican ideas. He sought compromise and consensus, and then went on to pass a solution.

Every bill that he has signed was achieved after the president, the Senate, and Congress south consensus and compromise. They are all achievements. The model works, even if it is not psychologically appealing to the base.

[Bluebear]

21. Cadillac tax. Mandates. No public option. "It will get done" - that's not a good solution.

[Ozymanithrax]

22. 45,000 people die a year because they have no health care.

48+ million have no health care.

A lot of them will be helped with this.

I would have liked to see single payer, and a public option would have been nice. But this bill will do a lot of good.

[4lbs]

31. Insurance companies will no longer be able to deny coverage because of pre-exisiting conditions.

I am one of those people denied.

Before I was "lucky" enough to find my current plan, I had no insurance because I was denied by 4 different carriers due to a pre-existing condition.

What's my current plan? I pay 250% more monthly than I used to, for 4x the deductible I had before ($2000 versus $500), double the copay ($40 versus $20), twice the cost for prescription drugs ($20 to $50 per versus $10 to $25 per), and half the lifetime and annual coverage limit ($2 million lifetime and $250K annual versus $4 million lifetime and $500K annual) as before.

Hence I used quotes around "lucky". Lucky enough to just have some health insurance now, versus not having it at all and being liable for the entire cost of any health visit. However, not anywhere nearly as good as before, because it's just basic coverage versus the great coverage I had before. Yet, I pay 2.5x more for simple basic coverage instead of the much better coverage I had.

All because of the pre-existing condition.

That's how this health care bill will directly affect me in a positive way.

While it will be 2013 before the exchanges are fully set up, the removal of the pre-existing condition for coverage consideration will be more immediate. Soon, very soon, after the bill is signed into law, I can re-apply for health insurance at any of those 4 providers that denied me before, and they MUST offer me coverage. If it's better than what I have now (likely), for the same amount (or even slighty more), I'll switch to them. It will at least offer me a choice between health insurance plans from private insurers, when I had none for the last 4 years. For the last 4 years I had just that expensive basic insurance plan, and the 4 years before that, I had no insurance at all hoping to not have any major health issues during that time.

[babylonsister]

33. Perish that thought; makes way too much sense. nt

[gateley]

17. I think we all have that need - it's what we want above all else. But I think he

sincerely does want bi-partisanship, and like us, kept hoping... We were just ready to throw in the towel earlier.

And I read the other day, that numerologically he is a 2 -- here's what it said:

TWOS want peace. They make good mediators.They are very loyal, and when they say that they love you,count on it!They welcome companionship and the chance to share their lives with someone special.The flip side is that if they feel threatened or pushed to the wall, they become the terrible 2s. But ultimately, they do not want conflict.

I'm a two, too :7 and that is certainly true of me. And all this time I thought it was because I raised Catholic! :hi:

[JuniperLea]

35. I'm a 1

But I want peace too... and I get what he's trying to do... but I'm tired of the ridiculous spin.

[gateley]

79. Actually, I think we ALL want peace, and I do believe we all need to feel loved.

I just threw in the numerological stuff as a tidbit - not an excuse -- hope that's not how it came across.

I DO know that if I can't get people to essentially kiss and make up it eats a hole in my stomach (even though intellectually I know better), but I'm not the POTUS. He's gotta lead and be strong -- and take on the "I welcome your hatred" attitude of FDR. I'm waiting and hoping for that day... :hi:

[JuniperLea]

85. It didn't come across that way at all...

He'll get there... he's on the path, I think. I also think he's setting an example of what a POTUS should be and how he/she should behave... like an adult. It's no surprise that seems like a foreign idea to so many. :hi:

[Echo In Light]

19. It's odd how some who vehemently deny any "conspiracy" that ascribes wrong-doing to the powerful...

... will simultaneously adopt the 'less harmful' ones (by establishment POV) ...in particular the idea that Bush invaded Iraq to 'get back at Saddam over his trying to assassinate his father' bullshit. US presidents don't actually dictate very much policy - they FOLLOW it. And is certainly not carried out via personal whims.

Not saying the OP is necessarily reflective of this...but it reminded me of that phenomenon

[NoodleyAppendage]

24. Bush wasn't driven by personal whims? Come on.

Bush is the poster child for persons who make decisions based upon "gut reactions," which are reactions more likely to be swayed by personal history and psychological factors.

[Echo In Light]

27. Bush, the person, likely made zero decisions, and only agreed to what his handlers wanted

Just like any US pres

[Gin]

26. I applaud his desire for bi-partisanship...but there is a point where he has

to see that is not going to happen and he is harming his own image. He looks needy.. and even though he can give a good speech....his position needs more than that...

(IMO)

[NoodleyAppendage]

30. That's what I was picking up on too. He appears needy.

Whether it's just a stubborn desire for consensus or something deeper, he's not appearing Presidential. Consensus is great if you can get it, but he should have seen the writing on the wall with the Republicans 6-9 months ago!

[upi402]

25. Why does he betray the people who put him there?

We sure don't love the guy anymore.

[Echo In Light]

28. How do we really know 'who' "put him there" given our elections are a sham?

At the very least, corporate powers green-light someone they know will abide The Rules, and from there, it's decided behind the scenes, in accordance w/whichever 'script' US elites want the populace to believe is actually happening, and then deem that candidate "electable," and the M$M and vast industry of punditry kicks in and sells the celebrity persona to the public, who buys into the folly as they've been conditioned to.

[optimator]

34. none of it really matters anymore

we are stuck with a legislator pretending to be an executive.

[FrenchieCat]

37. I think we are the ones with the problem;

We suffer from projection onto this President,
based on the abuse we received from the last President.

Many want a daddy figure on the one hand, but on the other, we want Daddy
to do exactly what we order. So as I see it, we've got a bunch of spoiled
ass princesses on our hands, and some want to be Daddy's baby who always gets
her/his way, and has daddy wrapped around our fingers.

This President, if he wanted to be so loved, would have either done it exactly as we prescribed it,
because as it stands, most on any side don't agree with him anyways.....so if what he was trying to achieve was universal love, he's done everything in order not to get it.

As to ascribing him as having an "issue" simply because some Liberals aren't happy;
well that is just plain stupid.

[NoodleyAppendage]

40. Great counterpoint, though I wasn't arguing that he has an "issue" because liberals are unhappy.

His tendency to compromise and seek consensus is a long-standing trait. Your point is reinforced by his not changing, but our willingness to see something different in him. Whether we see something different or not, it is his long-standing tendency towards compromise that I was addressing.

J

[FrenchieCat]

55. Certainly, he's one interested in getting somewhere, as opposed to each faction being locked up

in their own little room believing that they are the only ones with an acceptable POV.
I believe that he prefers solutions as opposed to stand offs where nothing gets done.
To me, that has little to do with wanting to be loved,
and has something to do with wanting to fix whatever is broken,
which is what our government is; broken.

It's one thing to acknowledge differences,
and something else to actually work through them.

The fact that he can see various points of view, and based on them, work on solutions,
simply means that he's good at putting himself in the shoe of others;
and not only those whom he favors, and taking steps moving forward while in those shoes.

I think that approach stems from having to adapt to various situations at varying moments in his life.
When one goes from every day squalor while living in Indonesia with Mom and a Stepfather,
to attending an elite Prep School in Hawaii while living with Grandparents,
to attending college in California on one's own, to one in New York, to the streets of Chicago,
to the halls of Harvard, to being the only Black kid among all asians,
to the only poor kid among mostly White folks, to the only Mixed kid in the lot,
to being College educated working with the uneducated;
all of those experiences provides one with many more dimensions in ways of seeing things.

His community activism is a perfect mirror to understanding how he works,
and in fact, his "Block by Block" bit hasn't changed much.
He is for those having an interest in solving problems actually getting involved
directly in solving the problem....and if factions disagree,
in working out their differences to come up with a workable way forward.
That's more effective than moaning and groaning and pointing fingers full of critiques.

If a majority of citizens are interested in getting something done,
than they need to participate....as he is one who expects anyone with a goal or a job to do,
to feel intensely enough to put skin in the game and to getting it done.

So whether it is a collection of activists getting out there and demanding what they want
by calling on those who can get that done (congress),
or a Congress doing the work that they are paid to do; in a democracy that is how it should work.

As for Daddy issues, or Abandonment issues, I'm not so sure that this is the sum of his parts,
and in fact, I suspect it is a very small part of who he is (and to be honest,
we all have issues, if were were to be honest, one way or another).

There are some similarities in how I and this President grew up, and plus,
I'm of the exact same generation as he is.

I also grew up in a single parent household, without a father, with a mother of a different race than I was (Mom is White, while my Dad was Black), in a place where I was the only "one" (in France), and we moved a lot, and where my White Aunt and Uncle "kept" me while my Mom worked (I'd see her on the Weekends).

I went from that to immmigrating to the US with my mother, where she remarried, and where all of the sudden I was surrounded by Black Folks (cause we moved to a neighborhood that was predominently Black), and then to an area that was mainly White. In each instance, I learned how to adapt, and I did so while having a great big French accent, and didn't look 100% Black, and yet certainly couldn't/didn't pass for White.

But the fact that I was different didn't make me miserable, instead it made me a leader. whether in France, as the only "Black" one or in the United states, where is some cases some might have seen me as not "Black" enough in an era and an area where "Black was Beautiful". What I wasn't ever was a follower, or someone who was gonna do what I could to be accepted, since I was too different for that, and always understood that I would stand out of a pack, no matter which pack it was.

I'll tell you that I thank my lucky stars everyday for my experiences,
as they have made me a person who can adapt to any situation at any time...
and I can deal with most folks, no matter where they come from,
and I am very understanding as to their different points of view.

I can start speaking French if the occasion calls for it,
or I can relate to my Black Brothers and sisters,
or I can talk business lingo or whatever.....

As for my absent Daddy, who passed away years ago, that has never been a stigma,
just a fact of life, one that actually made me a stronger individual and a better wife and a better parent to my own children.

So I feel I can relate to this President, and what it is that has made him a strong individual, and a natural leader who appreciates different perspectives and in the end, is more interested in forward results as opposed to being proven right.

We would all prefer to be liked than to be disliked so there is no real point in making that statement,
but I don't believe that's what drives him; to be accepted....
cause it appears that this has never been a real problem for him,
although it has been a challenge.

A problem and a challenge are not the same thing.

[Hansel]

118. He's doing exactly what he said he was going to do.

Changing the tone in Washington. He's going to continue to try to get the Republicans to play ball, but I think every game he comes to he's going to be bringing a bigger bat.

He gives his detractors every opportunity to legislate like adults, but they refuse to engage. His impatience with it was clearly visible at health care summit. When this health care reform bill passes they'll begin to see how futile their cynical and juvenile behavior is. And their criticisms of him will ring hollow because he incorporated many of their ideas into the bill. They'll be stunned when they find that their old tricks no longer work.

Right now many people think he's a sap. He's weak. He's the farthest thing from it. He's fed up with the silliest of Washington and the media. He refuses to let Washington continue to be a place of infotainment, but rather he sees it as dead serious business. It is his intent to force the media, the legislatures and the American people to stop looking at Washington as one big ongoing campaign of right against the left. Because if we do, this country is dead.

He is looking at the big picture and the long term. He will take the short terms loses and criticism for the long term gains in an effort to build certainty. Certainty that legislation is for statesmen and stateswomen. Not for clowns. The goal: to break the extreme cycles of "us against them mentality" that has been in Washington since Reagan. When he said that Reagan changed the trajectory of Washington with his presidency, I don't think he meant it as a compliment like many assumed. I think it is his intent to change it back to when people legislated more like statesmen.

He's going to get things done his way, through professional and adult compromise and agreement, despite all of the criticism and silly talk on the cable news shows and despite the hysterical Tea Partiers and the criticism from his own "supporters". When he passes Health Care after decades of failed attempts he will be taken seriously. Because that is going to be a huge victory whether people can see it or not and the Republicans are going to know for the first time in decades that they no longer control Washington or the narrative.

Edit to add: If he was motivated by wanting to be loved, he would have been guaranteed love by doing what his base wants him to do. I think it is generated by a great respect for his Mother and her vision of the world. I think it's important for him to see things from everyone's point of view and to be accepting of differences of culture, religion and different life experiences and backgrounds. And from that arrive at solutions that everyone can at least understand and live with.

[cornermouse]

45. Your daddy may have compromised.

My dad did not. I don't care why Obama's doing what he's doing. The important thing is to see when he does the wrong thing and speak up about it.

[FrenchieCat]

59. I grew up mainly without a father, so I never had a daddy to speak of.

As for this President, yes, you should speak up when YOU "think" he isn't doing what you "think" is "right", although you may not get a concensus each time that will agree with you in your assessement of what is right or wrong. You say your Dad never compromised...and perhaps that is why you only see it your way and everything else is wrong. That's not the kind of President that I want; unyielding and convinced of his own righteousness.....and so I'm very glad that Barack Obama isn't more like you.

[cornermouse]

110. Not so funny thing.

Anyone who speaks up in an effort to hold him accountable is attacked for being so bold as to think their vote mattered.

[FrenchieCat]

114. That wasn't me that started talking about other people's fathers......

that was you who attacked me.
let's not try to get it all twisted now.


cornermouse (1000+ posts) Fri Mar-05-10 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #37
45. Your daddy may have compromised.

[cornermouse]

120. A factual reminder of who brought up "daddy" first.

"Many want a daddy figure on the one hand, but on the other, we want Daddy
to do exactly what we order. So as I see it, we've got a bunch of spoiled
ass princesses on our hands, and some want to be Daddy's baby who always gets
her/his way, and has daddy wrapped around our fingers."

Just to keep things from getting "twisted" and also to point out that trying to use one's family as a point of attack in order to make a point is pretty low.

[Cosmocat]

49. BINGO ... His greatest gift ...

was on display during the campaign when he really did not lay out much in the say of specifics, and everyone just projected what they WANTED on to him ...

He really was brilliant with it in a get elected kind of way ...

If you REALLY listened and did not project on him, what you see now is pretty much what he SAID ...

Also, what is funny is how it is working both ways now ... The right wing nuts are projecting ALL KINDS of bizarre crape on him - socialist, communist, whatever ... And the lefties are left wanting to be all burnt out having projected what they wanted on him ...

Dude is just trying to get shiite done ...

[Spheric]

96. I would have been happy with him...

...for doing it as he prescribed it during the campaign.

[FrenchieCat]

97. For the most part he has.

He exactly stated that he would find common ground and
compromise, and change the tone of Washington......during the campaign.
of course, since the Republicans don't want to change shit,
then it makes Obama's job harder....but it hasn't been long enough
to know if things will change....so the judging is premature.....
and those who do the judging are quite unfair in their expectations.

[Name removed]

103. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

106. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Spheric]

115. I guess our relationship isn't going to work out. I had such high hopes...

Was it the reference to tough love? Maybe you're all about wimpy love.

You can call it Media talking points all you want, but I can guaran-damn-tee you that a party that either has no principles or is willing to abandon them at the drop of a hat has no chance at the polls. That is the unblemished truth, like it or not. And that is the image that Obama is portraying.

I am 55 years old and haven't missed an election cycle in my entire voting career. I have voted for the Democratic ticket in every election since I was able to vote. If you'd rather place my 37 posts here over my 37 years as a voting Democrat, so be it. But, I am not the enemy. Your inability or unwillingness to see the handwriting on the wall is.

[saracat]

117. Gosh. you are so classy. Love the adjectives.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

42. More like a deep seated need to play politics by maintaining the status quo.

He's a professional politician who follows the advice of his political advisers..no matter how stupid, or at what cost to the people.

[Arkana]

43. What the fuck is your problem?

[NoodleyAppendage]

50. People like you. n/t

J

[redqueen]

44. *roffle*

Man, this place.

[fascisthunter]

48. no... he's just another phony politician

who knows how to woo crowds with charisma. Too much merit is given to charisma in this country.

[FrenchieCat]

63. He may be a phony to you, but that would simply be your opinion,

not a fact.

Your consistent righteousness in how you might believe that everyone else should think as you do is telling, but in the real world, that's not how it works.

As for Charisma, it is part of what it takes, and no amount of you wishing it away is gonna change it, if you were to be realistic, which it has become evident, you are not.

But it is exactly because he has way more than just Charisma going for him,
and that he may be a problem to you...since you'd rather keep things simple in order to boil it down
to something that fortifies your very own point of view, when your view isn't all that there is.

I suspect there are many phony activists on this site,
who do a whole lot of talking, but no much more.

I'm not saying you are one of them, but the flat view that you have of the world,
doesn't necessarily make you a better person than those who resist analyzing only
in the negative, this one man.

[earth mom]

53. Money and votes are what it's all about. nt

[LanternWaste]

54. I see compromise and tolerance more the measure of..

I see compromise and tolerance more the measure of an individuals managerial style and pragmatic perception that people must co-exist and less an indication of daddy-issues. If I thought that were the case, I'd be forced to presume the same about the vast majority of great statesmen in throughout human history.

I perceive no "need for acceptance". Merely a tactic to most effectively and efficiently promote an agenda.

[anonymous171]

87. Compromise for compromise's sake is indicative of "daddy issues"

Obama wants to be loved by everyone and so makes sure that they support his proposals even though he does not really need their approval.

[LanternWaste]

94. Post hoc ergo prompter hoc...

Post hoc ergo prompter hoc...

[Orsino]

56. No.

He knows that the only way to be heard through the corporate influence is with the largest possible public consensus, so he has always been about building coalitions. That means a lot of compromise.

Unfortunately, not enough Americans are really all that interested in reform--or not enough of us are coherent about what we want/need. for now, the corporations still drown us out, or nearly so. It is not fair to blame all of this on the president.

[Quezacoatl]

58. I hate to admit it

but I think it's a lack of experience and courage.

The President has reversed his positions one too many times when presented with a challenge. He doesn't have the courage to fight and lose. He's scared and he is in danger of looking very weak.

I predict he will be much more progressive when he is an ex-president. He will be a much better ex-president than he ever was a president.

I was very happy he chose to run at the time he did but now I think President Obama in 2016 would have been a much stronger president than the 2009 President Obama.

[Grand Taurean]

62. He is inexperienced.

This was my greatest concern about him. An inexperienced President during a time of crisis is not going to turn out well.

[FrenchieCat]

67. He's turning out just fine.

All Presidents are inexperienced at being President when they first start.
There are no exception to this rule....even the Wife of a President
wasn't ever President, and didn't see any more than a chief of staff would have....
and even being Governor doesn't prepare one for the office of the Presidency.

I'm just amazed on how many folks without anymore experience feel qualified
to make these calls. What makes you so much more special in believing that
you are making the right assessement, while those who differ aren't.....?

[Grand Taurean]

71. I have noted the blind supporters of the President around here.

It's alright, every President has them.

[FrenchieCat]

72. I have noted the blind, who do not want to see that reasonably speaking,

this President is doing just fine.

You can call me what you'd like,
as I have no control over that,
but I am as aware as you are,
because you can be sure that I am as educated,
insightful, seasoned, and as thoughtful as you are,
and not less so.

[Grand Taurean]

73. Still in denial.

[FrenchieCat]

74. Yes you are, and self righteous as well.

Too bad for you, although I don't really give a shit.

[Grand Taurean]

76. Still in denial.

At the end of the day it will be Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid who will get us healthcare reform, not the President.

[FrenchieCat]

81. Your denial is duly noted......

This President is doing reasonably fine still,
and that's a fact, whether you like it or not,
and for you to presume anything else, is going against
documented evidence. 53% approval rating during a crisis
does not prove out your "he's inexperienced" concerns, period.
Him being closer to any kind of health care legislation
than many other Presidents have, also belies your "opinion".

You can sign up to DU in January of this year,
and talk forcefully through one liners all you want,
but that simply doesn't make your assessment true,
it just makes it your assessment.
Some will agree with you, and others won't. Those are facts too.

So yeah, you are in denial that many don't hold your view.
That's something that you will simply have to deal with,
cause dissenting views about what you think will remain
and aren't going anywhere.

[Grand Taurean]

83. Still in denial you are.

Thank Nancy and Harry for the progress being made.

[JuniperLea]

89. That's a sadly dated RW talking point...

I would be embarrassed to use it around here.

[readmoreoften]

65. The need to be loved by powerful corporations who fund his campaigns.

[clowncar]

66. Not at all

I think it is just his background as a Community Organizer. CO's have to bring everyone together to create a better community. If only more people would do that.....

[DireStrike]

69. To be fair, in that regard he IS providing change.

However, the opposition is a bunch of completely unscrupulous liars who consistently use the dirtiest trick in the book to smear their opponents and come out ahead.

If the republicans acted more like humans, Obama might be onto something.

[anonymous171]

75. You don't try to reason with a rabid dog. You put it down.

Obama's attempts at bipartisanship are just like a man trying to talk the rabies out of his pet. It's fucking stupid.

[JuniperLea]

77. What nonsense...

You just don't get it at all... what a pity.

[anonymous171]

80. I suggest you read up on American political system and its history.

The only way you can make things work is by steamrolling the opposition. James Buchanan tried the whole, "Let's work it out" approach and ended up destroying the Union.

[JuniperLea]

88. Times have changed...

Just as it would be foolish to build a stock portfolio based on past performance, it's foolish to think that the only way things can be is firmly based on how things have always been.

Steamrolling is crude, boorish, and a painfully antiquated tactic... no matter who uses it. I for one am happy an adult is in charge.

[Grand Taurean]

78. Yes it is and we are all going to pay for his foolishess.

[JuniperLea]

90. What nonsense...

We've already paid. We have been heading over Niagara Falls and for some bizarre reason, we're not in pieces at the bottom. That didn't happen on its own you know.

Foolishness? Amazing... simply amazing.

[Grand Taurean]

91. Truth.

Surprisingly, Harry and Nancy are trying to save us.

[JuniperLea]

92. Harry and Nancy?

Short attention span?

[Grand Taurean]

93. They are.

Most likely they know inaction will cost them their jobs and the Democratic majority.

[bvar22]

82. No. It is fueled...

...by a very deep pocket filled with money from Wall Street and the Health Insurance Industry.
He IS from Chicago...fer gawds sake.

Follow The Money.

"By their works you will know them."

[MadBadger]

84. So are we supposed to be his fucking psychiatrist now?

[blogslut]

86. Sorry

But no.

[NYC_SKP]

95. It must be Friday. n/t

[CBR]

98. No. He just is different from you. nt

[saracat]

99. It isn't that Obama compromises.It is WHO he compromises with.

He doesn't compromise with progressives at all. He only compromises with the GOP. He didn't aspire to be part of the ruling class. He grew up in a comparatively wealthy family. His stepfather was a wealthy oil exec.. Obama's family paid paid for travel and Ivy League schools. He went to prep school and his grandmother was a banker. His mother was well known anthropologist.it isn't as though he was a ghetto kid. He identifies with the rich.

[MerryBlooms]

100. No

I believe his willingness to include everyone comes from the fact that anything center or left of center, was ignored during the Bush years. The President is supposed to represent ALL of America. I know my frustration with living under Bush and feeling like my president wasn't MY president and felt completely unrepresented ... maybe president Obama is trying hard not to alienate and dismiss US citizens the way Bush did.

[Toasterlad]

101. No, It's Fueled By His Eagerness To Do the Bidding Of His Masters

Whether it's out of self-preservation or financial reward, I don't know. But it ain't love.

[FrenchieCat]

102. He has no master....just constituents.....

and we are them, and his job ain't to simply please the ones you
think he should.

You were right about one thing though....you really don't know.

[Name removed]

112. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

113. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

104. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Number23]

109. lol! +500000!

[ieoeja]

105. No. He is trying to be a uniter.

Dumbya said he'd be a uniter, then rammed his agenda through Congress. His predecessor, Clinton, did the same thing as President. Same for the Reagan/Bush administrations before that.

The Cold War brought us the imperial presidency. If the Soviets went for a first launch, the President would not have time to consult Congress before retaliating. So by necessity the presidency was given that imperial power.

Note to DUers who think "imperial presidency" means a President that runs an American Empire, it doesn't. It means a President who takes upon him/herself imperial trappings where the Congress does the bidding of the President rather than the other way around.

Over time those powers grew to the point where you had Presidents using military power without consulting Congress even when there was no emergency. More than that, as noted above, we just ended a period in which the Presidents acted like Congress had to do their bidding. And the GOP, at least, dutifully followed their Presidents wrong-or-wrong. (That was actually a mistake as I meant to write "right"; but if the mistake fits....)


The point being, the imperial presidency is a serious long-term hazard to the health of the American system of government. It needs to be reeled in. And while Obama promised to do so, and appears to be keeping that promise, the real test is whether Congress will reel in the next would-be emperor.


Also, Obama is trying to build a consensus AMONG THE PEOPLE. Why can't DUers understand this simple fact? It isn't about getting ELECTED Republican support. It's about getting Republican and Independant VOTERS support for an issue so that the Republics can't just toss everything out the moment they get back in power.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

111. One of my friends had that theory about why Clinton caved in so easily

His theory was that having come from a working class background, Clinton wanted to be accepted by the movers and shakers and felt insecure enough to compromise his principles to win that approval.

It was like a kid from the wrong side of the tracks trying to break into the "cool kids'" inner circle.

[depakid]

122. +1

[KamaAina]

116. I cannot believe I just read that.

:wtf:

[DFLforever]

119. I don't think he has any discernible' need' for acceptance

In fact I think he's one of the the most self-sufficient people I've ever seen in public office. He doesn't need to be slapped on the back and praised or called a great man like so many of our presidents have.
He doesn't appear to have the glaring character failings of some of our recent ones

Politics is the art of compromise. If you can't compromise, you don't belong in public life. Maybe you should join a church where you can be as pontifical and principled as you please without ruining the lives of too many others.

[depakid]

121. Seems a plausble enough explanation for what often seems to be dysfunctional conlict aversion

Wouldn't necessarily attribute it to father issues (and the better comparison there would be Clinton who, as we've observed with Obama did seem to have be motivated by a need for everyone to like and accept him).

As to Obama, this sort of need for acceptance "by both sides" deal can be seen way back- in high school and law school, perhaps abroad in primary school as well if one were to look back).

My bet is Republican strategists see this too- and it's part of the reason why they're so recalcitrant with his bipartisan overtures- to deny him that which they believe he wants most, and in doing so gain unwarranted concessions- which alienates the Democratic base and may well limit his presidency to a single term in the process.

[NoodleyAppendage]

123. Whatever the motivations, I think you are correct about the Repuke actions capitalizing on them. n/t

J