In Light of the Budget Deal: Obama’s Personality (he told us in advance who he was)

[Karmadillo]

http://www.ianwelsh.net/obamas-personality/

In Light of the Budget Deal: Obama’s Personality
2011 April 9
by Ian Welsh
Sometimes our early take on a man is the best. In 2006, I wrote “I believe Obama“. (Re-repost, because it seems… appropriate.)

One of my rules of analysis is that I believe people when they tell me who they are. That doesn’t mean I believe everything they say – I never believed Bush was a moderate, for example, because I believed what he told me when he refused to correct obviously false budget numbers. His budget plan spent the surplus twice, and I believed that’s what he would do. And, needless to say, I was right (well sort of, he spent even more than that, but you get the point.)

People tell you who they are all the time, all you have to do is listen, separate out the noise intended to distract you, and then believe them. Bush’s record of failure at everything he did, for example, was clear. His slurring of words and inability to talk coherently was clear. His code-speaking to the Christian right was clear. All these things were there to see in 2000.

So, let’s talk about someone else. Obama. I’ve been listening to Obama and I’ve been hearing what he has to say. He’s been pretty hostile to the netroots, contemptuous and dismissive, and I’ve heard that and I believe it. Obama is telling me he has no respect for the sort of people who make up the netroots. I think he’s sincere – I don’t think it’s “just” a tactical move. He genuinely dislikes people getting worked up over issues. It makes him uncomfortable. He wants everything and everyone to be “nice”. I believe him when his words and actions tell me that, just as when he backed down from McCain when McCain unfairly attacked him, I believed what that told me about his spine and about the fact that he prefers peace to conflict, even when he’s in the right. I believe him when he says he admires John McCain and that he admires Joe Lieberman and I understand what that says about him (because, of course, if you actually follow McCain and Lieberman you know they aren’t even close to men of their word. And Obama knows that.)

Obama has told me who he is, and I have listened. If he gets into power he will compromise/compromise/compromise, because he believes in it – not as a means, but as an end. He will shy away from big fights, because he doesn’t like fighting. He may “believe” in universal healthcare, but he believes in compromise more. And I’m betting I know which belief will win out.

more...

[cantbeserious]

1. Compromising Obama - As Is Said, Actions Speak Louder Than Words

eom

[High_On_Love]

2. I love our prez

Obama is a great prez. I will stand with him no matter what happens. He is THE president of the century!

[msongs]

7. lol there's only been two prezidents this century nt

[Recovered Repug]

17. Technically three.

Clinton was still president at the start of 2001. Either way,"the best president this century" isn't saying much.

[High_On_Love]

20. Yes but

This century won't see another like him! Nobody can fill his shoes.

And his ears! I think they're awesome! :) :) But I digress.

[northernlights]

3. sometimes even words speak loudly

Obama told us not to listen to what he says, but watch what he does.

Sell us out at every turn, from what I can see...

[jaxx]

4. Ho hum, another psuedo-psychoanalyst without a clue.

[tcaudilllg]

5. LOL you just threw away your worth.

[jaxx]

6. Uh no, I just said it was bunk.

[FredStembottom]

10. Without a clue?

You did notice that the piece was written in 2006?

It's stunningly "clued".

Ho-hum to your willful ignorance.

[Karmadillo]

21. Ho-hum. Another debunking without the debunk.

nt

[Maven]

22. Interesting that your pic shows Obama with his back turned to us.

How appropriate.

[KoKo]

8. Some may have missed Ari Berman's Expose on what Jim Messina did to NetRoots Activist Dems/ Video

There is an interview and link to transcript about how Obama early in his Administration cut off those who had worked hard to get him elected.

Transcript is there for DU'ers who can't do the video but the video is worth the watch...also the article linked on this thread by the DU'er who put it all together.

http://election.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=569836&mesg_id=571686

[TimesSqCowboy]

9. I think he simply acknowledges the fact

That many Americans have Opinions that are different than his or the Dem party's and that they have a right to be represented in government decision-making. It's that simple. People act as though aliens dropped from outer space and asked for budget cuts. Not at all: the party that won the House saying they would seek budget cuts are now seeking budget cuts. Is it weak to give Americans some of what they voted for?

[sabrina 1]

23. Sure, always after a sell-out, or failure to fight, or loss for the people

come the excuses. Thanks for being on cue with the latest.

We expect it now.

Offshore drilling, what was the excuse for that now, I forgot.

Mandated Ins. I sort of remember the excuses for that

OP, yeah, he 'didn't have the votes' :eyes:

Bush Tax Cuts. Excuse?? Had to bargain for extension of UE. Reality, no he didn't. But since he kept it off the table until AFTER the election, most of us knew then, that there was going to a capitulation, or whatever it is he does on every important issue he ran he.

I could go on, but you're new, we've heard all the excuses, and we'll hear more as he gives away more.

Frankly I've lost interest in the WH. I'm focusing on Congress for the next election, and probably won't even bother to watch the coverage of the presidential race. Vote for him because the alternative is nightmarish, but work for him? No way.

[PATRICK]

11. Getting back to Bush- and others

this post is empirically accurate, though brief. Bush could have delivered minuscule service to the country and raked in true popularity. He put the evil pedal to the grinding metal and relied on disasters to get enough "capital" to do what Cheney wanted.

In Obama"s own(self-written) book there were damaging intimations of New Dem philosophy(the contentiousness of unions being obsolete). His gratuitous, heartfelt praise of Reagan was not isolated from other Dems like Clinton and there was some bending to destructive Reagan goals completely incongruous with any dem platform and progressive politics.

Excuses about stealthy cleverness and politics may also be true, but what trust then could be placed in stump speeches to the Democratic base?

I do believe it is cynicism, a test which I hope some future president may fail, that the flaws or doubts about a president become(once anointed by election) the keystone flaws of governance---and big time. Theoretically we know that but in practice it seems so horrifically worse and hardly mitigated by experience in office which should point in new positive directions. Elections seem to affirm flaws and magnify them with entitlement, the good is pragmatically discarded. Blood flows, opportunities are lost and the president diminishes as his grasp on mere power and re-election increases.

It is a miserable pattern that only a very few accidental or caretaker presidents seem to break(TR Roosevelt, Truman). It is suspiciously set in concrete in the age of big corporate capital which seems to thrive most on evils at the top of all sorts, including incompetence, stupidity, and fanaticism.

Obama's miserable competition had flaws that would have risked even the possibilities of election in the first place. Democrats shoved aside the wisdom of experience for hope then had no way to influence or force better out of the anointed party leader. You can spread the praise or blame however you want the unfertile manure smells the same, and for that general observation the current one sitting on top is Obama, and seems pretty set with the program where change is mostly propping the old at the expense of past and future goods. By their actions most of the other Dems are at the least on board with this.

[newspeak]

19. yes, his book gave signs of his ideology

I knew Hillary was a DLC corporatist and was concerned about Obama because of his book. After Little Boots reign we needed FDR not Hoover--we got Hoover. The MSM made sure that we would have two corporate choices (that's the way I look at it). Anyone who actually fights for the majority of the people against the corporate, wealthy status quo is not allowed to remain in the race and the MSM is very complicit in making that happen.

My eyes are wide open now--we may vote but it seems the choices have been made, not necessarily by the proles.

So, as my german grandfather (who hated Hitler with a passion) before me, I proudly proclaim my party--democratic socialist-me and Bernie Sanders. At one time I begged Wellstone to run for president--now I'll do my begging with Bernie. I will vote for those who believe in labor, worker's safety, the social safety net and actually care about the well being of americans over business (global and domestic).

[Cameron27]

12. Donny McClurkin was the first clue for me.

The cold-hearted dismissal of the protests told me exactly what to expect from an Obama presidency. I'm not sure it's about compromise though. Either the man has absolutely no line in the sand, or else he uses the appearance of compromise as a tactic to get exactly what he's aiming for in the first place.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

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

[Beacool]

14. Yep, pretty much nailed him.

"Obama has told me who he is, and I have listened. If he gets into power he will compromise/compromise/compromise, because he believes in it – not as a means, but as an end. He will shy away from big fights, because he doesn’t like fighting. He may “believe” in universal healthcare, but he believes in compromise more. And I’m betting I know which belief will win out."

The guy may have been prescient, but it was there for all to see. I remember reading that the joke around the state legislature in IL had been that if a difficult vote was to be cast "Barack would be in the bathroom". He didn't believe in making waves because he didn't want to make enemies since he had bigger plans for himself. Similar tactic that he used as a US senator. Ironically enough since he later endorsed him, Ted Kennedy once got angry at him because Obama showed up for the photo-op of a bill that he had co-sponsored but had never been at the weekly 7:30 AM meetings to work on the bill as Teddy and others had been. He was the reverse Hillary, she had once said that she got into the senate to be a "work horse" and not a "show horse". Obama would be bored at meetings and hated the slow pace of the senate and its archaic protocols. He once famously passed a note to Gibbs during a session where Biden went on and on, the note read "shoot me now".

I think that Obama's ego catapulted him ahead of his actual experience. Americans being Americans, never did their due diligence and fell for this charismatic man and his soaring campaign speeches without attempting to peek at what was behind the facade.

:shrug:

[sufrommich]

15. Obama can't get angry, he's a black man. Let's not pretend

that he's not operating under a different set of rules than past presidents have. I know no one here likes to talk about it, but that doesn't make it any less true.

[Beacool]

18. That's nonsense and a cop out.

Obama is about Obama. He figured how to become a state senator the easy way by managing to have every other Democrat's signatures off the petition, including that of the lady who had been a mentor and had supported him. Alice Palmer had been a an icon in the community, she never ran for office again. Years later she supported Hillary instead of Obama, nobody likes to be backstabbed. How did he become US senator? By sheer luck, the two main Republicans had to bow out for personal reasons and the party had to draft a candidate from out of state.

Obama deserves plenty of criticism, excusing him by saying that people oppose him because he's black is mostly B.S. Not to say that there are no racists in the country, because there are plenty, but most people are far more interested in his actions than in the tone of his skin.

;)

[AzDar]

16. K & R

:kick: