The Maturing Presidency of Barack Obama

I would like to be approved to comment in the future....I thought this was a truly brilliant article...in my opinion, your commentators are among if not the best on the web

http://www.usmagazine.com/click-here-to-see-whats-on-barack-obamas-i%5Bpod

Europe is struggling for leadership from the US. When they ask for something other than "Cowboy Diplomacy" what choice are they given? The security of the time tested philosophy of Winnie the Pooh. If Obama wins in November...God help us....cause the democrats can't. All they needed to know they learned in Kindergarten.

My fear is not of his maturing but of his reactions to events beyond his control. You have to look at things through his perspective - and that, I think, is that he believes everything is under his control. Look at his career so far: community "organizer", gets in the state legislator where a godfather makes him, then onto the US Senate after a judge destroys the frontrunner by airing his private business in a divorce case, one term in the Senate as the uber-liberal, defeats the heavily favored frontrunner who for the first time in her career makes a tactical error, and, like magic, a stone's throw from the presidency. This is phenominal; the Fates have been perfect. This is his worldview - I am what you've been waiting for, everything goes my way...

...and if it doesn't, we get a peek at his reaction: takes offense when his imperfections are noticed (the female reporter's comments about his ears), huffs away during a press conference when the questions about Rezko don't stop (all eight of them), slanders his own grandmother after being blindsided and stung by Wright, and, of course, who can forget that poignant moment when he wanted to spend some quality time with his waffle.

Those little things scream the loudest. I don't think the comparison to Bush is prophetic in any way. How GW reacted to his dealt hand was exactly the way the voters anticipated - with level headed confidence, a confidence backed by faith in God and America instead of ego. Does Obama's faith in our country go as deep? Without the faith that we are the greatest country on the planet, you're not gonna mature as president. Maturity requires the humility that you do not know everything better than everyone.

So how will he react in a crisis? Who knows - but what is usually the reaction when a pampered, spoiled child full of himself gets his first dose of the reality that things do not always go their way? That's what I'm afraid of.

"He (GW) was derided by most of his enemies as the son of privilege who fortuitously graduated to the role of the accidental, slumbering president. This is partly the way many view Barack Obama at this juncture." Are you trying to compare BOs upbringing with GWs? That is a premise that I think only zealots would agree with. There is little to compare how these two men were raised. Since the rest of your "argument" rests on this premise, it would be a logical fallacy to argue that since GW and BO were similarly raised, they will bring the same mindframe and therefore will react similarly to adversity while president.

The truth of the matter is we never knew how GW would to react to 9/11. You point out, "it was deeply held conservative values that rose to the top as he became a man furious at the evil that had been perpetrated against this country's innocent" So therefore, you argue that BOs liberalism (that bad parts of course) will rise to the top under adversity yet you provide no concrete evidence for this postulate.

The truth is we don't know how BO would react under these circumstances. We also don't know how his policies would be received by so-called "evil doers" in the future. Regan helped bring down the wall by having a dialogue and relationship with Moscow. GW was in the middle east to help negotiate peace TALKS between Israel and Palestine. I understand that there is a big difference between a muslim extremist regime and Gorbachev, but couldn't a similar situation happen under a BO presidency...or a McCain presidency? You must acknowledge that it could. Although most on this site think all liberals are tree-hugging pacifists, and many liberals think conservatives are war mongering hawks, aggressive tactics have been initiated under democratic administrations (Clinton, FDR) in the past and peace talks have been used under republican administrations (Regan).

This op-ed is all op...hold the facts. It is merely conjecture.

Excellent article.

I do disagree with this point:

"He will very likely engage in the same kind of self flagellation and tiresome soul searching most progressives became consumed with shortly after we were cowardly attacked. "

The "liberals" do not engage in self flaggelation or soul searching. Their contempt is not for themselves, but for President Bush, thee and me. For the bible totin', gun lovin' (i.e., freedom of religion, freedom of speech and right to self defense) people.

They oh so innocently believe that we are the source of all evil, that we are racists and imperialists plundering the world for our selfish greed. They consider themselves above Western history, they are who they have been waiting for. They just can't understand that the only other people who have been waiting for them are the socialists who have been religiously indoctrinating them to hate America and Americans in order to emasculate and bring us down.

Do not mistake their posturing for self examination, that is not the case. Do not mistake their self righteousness for soul searching, they do not believe in souls, and would steal from us ours, if we let them.

Re: Matt Dick's...post;

Our -President- should be more concerned with carrying the "Football"...and not an IPOD!

Most people have an experience before, in, or around middle age that brings them into maturity.

That kind of maturity isn't visible on the personality and character of Obama. There doesn't seem to be the humility one would expect of a mature person.

In its stead, we see Obama's naive but powerful narcissistic tendencies...his messiah complex.

As J.C. Watts said recently (quoting a coach), "When people put you on a pedestal, that's their fault. If you believe it, that's your fault."

Obama is way up on his pedestal and at some point he will fall. If he falls in the Office of the Presidency, one can only imagine the repercussions for the country.

I find the very prospect of an Obama Presidency increasingly disturbing.

In his work The Farther Reaches of Human Nature, Abraham Maslow pointed out that mankind's hierarchy of needs at the highest level are "being" or "growth needs" or enduring motivations or drivers of behavior, leading those primary drivers is morality. Obama is indeed a man of the left and identifies with its concept of morality. Today's American leftist morality is rooted in Noam Chomsky's pseudo-scientific claim that when man is stripped of his environmental programming he is in essence a liberal (socialist).

Obama's first mentor was a well known American communist, Frank Marshall Davis,
Obama's first course of action on entering various universities was to seek out leftist professors and make leftist friends, and his minister of twenty-years taught a brand of Marxism known as Black Liberation Theology. There can be no question that Obama's core rests on leftist morality.

All the high flying rhetoric of his campaign is compelled by that morality. In the company of like minded friends in San Francisco he acknowledged that middle America is still attached to wayward environmental programming and he is taking it upon himself to strip those souls to their essence. So what would lead anyone to believe that when faced with the trials and tribulations of our times that Obama would deny his own core morality after taking up the reigns as commander in chief?

The perfect historical example is Jimmy Carter. Carter lambasted Americans for having an "inordinate fear" of Communism and explained that Russia would "continue to push for communism throughout the world and to probe for possibilities for expansion of their system, which I think is a legitimate purpose for them." Obama's response to being weak on today's terrorist threat, "What they're (Repubs) trying to do is to do what they've done every election cycle, which is to use terrorism as a club to make the American people afraid." Carter was lead by his primary motivating force, his concept of morality, which lead to his green lighting the Iraq invasion of Iran, which lead to the arming of the mujahadeen that inspired the Soviet-Afghanistan War, which resulted in the rise of al Qaeda. Obama's sense of morality leads him to meet with the primary funding agent of world terrorism that now resides in the seat of authority provided by Carter's ousting of the Shah of Iran.

I doubt there will be one, but you needn't worry about an Obama presidency. Only a handful of Democrat Members of Congress are lunatics, and the rest, like their GOP brethren, are sensible people. Also the professionals in the Pentagon won't let the president do anything stupid. This commander-in-chief stuff, while technically true, operates with in rather narrow contraints.

I am a Former ReCon Marine who did two tours in Nam and served 6 years in the USMC . First off you had to graduate in the top 10 % of your class from Paris Island or Q-CO just to try to be a ReCon Marine .
It goes far beyond a very good IQ , Physical and Mental abilities ... Believe me !
There is no such thing as Maturing on the Job training to be a ReCon Marine , Navy Seal or Army Special Forces . If you fail one class your done and out ! Sometimes you get a second try but that is it !
It took Me 26 Months of brutal training in all areas from going days without food or sleep . Knife Rifle and Pistol having to shoot expert , Army Jump School , Seal Team 21 School at Little Creek VA , Scuba school 1-2 , Rubber Boat and Submarine training , Quick Kill , Cold weather training , Mountain Repel school , Demolition school 1-2 , Jungle Warfare and Ambush training , Escape and Evasion , Pric 21 (radio ) . I could go on and on Like Running BLINDLY in the Dead of Night or sitting in ice water for 20 minutes and then having to perform perfectly in thinking and shooting .
But why did the USMC do this to all of us ? Because many lives of Marines and Army CO.s relied on us and were at stake .
Oboma is Two years on the Job . Hardily the training to be President of the most powerful County ever .

BO is winging it! He has no more idea what he wants to do as President than I do as airline pilot. I'm sure he will be just as good a President as I would be pilot, with the same disasterous results!

What he will do in a crisis is what all lefties to: First, cry foul; "Hey, no fair!" Second, navel gazing; "Why are they doing that to us? What did we do to them, where did we go wrong?!" Third, appeasment; "Talk to me, tell me how you feel. What do you want? Here, I'm offering you everything, just quit being mean to me!" Finally, acceptance of the new norm; "Look, we'll accept your position as long as you don't go any further." Of course, whatever adversary he is dealing with will laugh heartily and promise anything while simultaneously plotting his next outrage.

There's now doubt what BO would do as POTUS!

Obama's foreign policy could well be so bad that we literally won't live for him to tax and regulate us into miserable lives as serfs.

I think IndePaul misunderstands the author's premise (he for sure misunderstands Reagan's "relationship" with Moscow). Gail S seems to have a pretty good handle on liberals, though.

George W an "accidental, slumbering president" prior to 911? Everyone would do well to remember that he scored at least two major legislative successes in the months before the attack. However you may feel about No Child Left Behind and the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, they were significant achievements for his administration and the fulfillment of campaign promises. And he, more or less, has been beating his legislative opposition like the proverbial rented mule ever since. I chide him more for the legislative battles he abandoned, like Social Security and health care reform, but, of course, after 911 even bigger fish required his attention and use of political capital.

I do, however, agree that a reconstituted, stronger, more mature George Bush emerged from the rubble of the WTC. One of the reasons I voted for him in 2000 was his rejection of nation building as a proper role for the US and, in particular, its military, and his assertion that national interest should drive military intervention decisions. But by the early afternoon of Sept. 11, it was clear the events of the day would necessitate a critical paradigm shift. That Bush understood this so well and acted accordingly is the reason I voted for him in '04 (and honest to God, for all his faults and as much as I disagree with him on a whole range of issues, as angry as he's made me on any number of occasions, I'd vote for him again).

As to Obama, well, of course we can't know how, or even if, a major crisis like 911 would "reshape" him, but we can guess. My guess, like the author's, is that his paradigm, far from shifting, will be reinforced. And not only because of his core principles and values but also due to his background and life experiences.

I consider a boy's relationship, or lack of same, with his father to be the most significant of his young life and a precursor of his future character and behavior. George W benefited from the example of his father the family man, fighter pilot, CIA director, ambassador, vice-president, president, war-time commander-in-chief. Obama had no relationship with his father, a man of questionable morals and ethics who abandoned his young family and responsibilities the moment they became inconvenient (and later the already scarred young boy suffered his mother's abandonment as well). This was compounded by the disappointment of discovering, as Obama admits, that even his "dreams of my father" bore no relation to the reality. The young Obama struggled mightily to find a sense of self and belonging. While such struggles can forge a muscular self-confidence and a strength of character and purpose, there's not much to suggest they did so in Obama's case.

In any event, I sincerely hope this discussion will be rendered moot and in future we will be spared the anguish of wondering how "trial and tribulation" will shape a President Obama.

If you truly believe that Bush rose to the occasion of 9-11 and has handled the War on Terror in an ideal way, then I guess we'll just have to disagree, right there.

Bush's failings are legion:

His total lack of experience or understanding of foreign history or culture, lumping together regimes as diverse as al-Qaeda, Iraq, Iran, etc., into one alleged monolithic threat. His own idealistic naivete ("Middle East Muslims desire freedom just like Methodists"). His grandiose strategic schemes ("We're changing the map of the Middle East") while Rumsfeld refused to authorize the military buildup needed to make that feasible. His attempt to fight a global war with a peacetime economy, stimulating the economy after 9-11 not by vastly expanding the army but with a tax cut. Driving up the deficit with a trillion-dollar war in Iraq that was never paid for, driving down the value of the dollar, driving up the dollar price of commodities.

I'm not voting for Obama, but I'm at least willing to accept the electorate's judgment if they do end up voting for him.

At least Obama can learn from Bush's mistakes. He could conceivably craft a new foreign policy, that is more realistic about what America can accomplish as long as the Middle East holds all the oil cards. (The West can definitely put al-Qaeda out of business. But as long as we continue to guzzle oil like it's going out of style, we are NEVER going to "change the map of the Middle East.") Obama can make American energy independence from oil into a centerpiece of a new policy. And he can show that "monolithic Islam" is as much of a canard as "monolithic Communism" proved to be in the 1960s.

If not, and Obama proves to be another President Carter, I have faith in the American political system. If President Obama fails, we'll deal with it. As we did in 1980.

Just as the electorate is dealing with Bush's failures now.

Engaging in dialogue works if you can agree on basic principles: i.e. the value of life. In the case of the Islamic fundamentalists, they have demonstrated that they do not value life. One cannot dialogue if what you value most is that which they do not value. This may seem trite, but I remember the Sting song lyrics, "I hope the Russians love their children, too." Zeal to die and go to an afterlife and take someone who doesn't want to do that with you is not conducive to a good or even neutral relationship. The willingness to understand that basic premise and judge if the other entity or person is at odds with your basic values determines your attitude and actions towards them. I fear that Obama doesn't understand that and wouldn't have the character or courage to face that appropriately. I.e., if they profess they wish to destroy you and their behavior has matched their rhetoric, then don't give them time to act on their rhetoric again.

SteveL: I've seen several posts that have alluded to the idea that we as a nation "dealt" with the time and aftermath of Jimmy Carter and "If President Obama fails, we'll deal with it"

There is absolutly no comparison between then and now.

Carter did not have:
1. A war in progress.
2. A foe perfectly willing to commit suicide to further its aims.
3. Terrorism as a threat to the homeland.
4. A nation with its hands tied by insane left wing environmental laws and regulations.
5. A nation reeling from astronomical energy prices and a legislature on "drugs". Nothing short of narcotic enhanced euphoria can explain much of our Congressional action such as "lets raise taxes on the "rich"now", "lets raise taxes on gasoline now", "lets penalize Big Oil for making a profit", "lets buy into the already exposed as a hoax Global Warming Cultism", "lets take a large potion of our food crops and convert them to ethanol, the poor can eat cake".

I could make this list longer but I hope you get the picture. The disaster potential of an Obama presidency is comparable to a the destructive power of a tornado versus Carters summer thunder storm.

PC is Thought Control
LEE

Rob Zerona: Europe is "struggling for leadership from the US"? Since when? They've never wanted any before. Even in the Cold War most went along grudgingly, resenting the upstart nation that (in their eyes) had wrested power from its betters.
Where is their military? Europe combined should have at least as large a military as the US. They have as much to protect as we do. But they believe the world is peaceful except for the US and its warmongers. Let them enjoy their peace - the "peace" of Islam.
You say they want leadership but they complain when the US leads and then they complain when we don't. Either we're selfish and lazy or we're arrogant and bossy, depending on the situation. Nothing makes them happy. They call for American intervention only in places they know we won't set foot - like Darfur. They accuse us of supporting dictators, like Saddam, and then complain when we remove dictators. They don't want leadership. They want a leader who will do as he's told - what they tell him to do.

First of all I have to just step back for a second and say I don't think I have ever seen such well thought-out comments on any blog. How refreshing to see people articulate such well thought arguements.

By the way SteveL, one thing about your point is lacking. We are STILL dealing with the failure of Jimmy Carter because of his handling of Iran and we are still dealing with this idiot traveling the world and making a fool of himself.

Jeff:
Yes, Well thought out. The difference between Free men exercising Free will and the minions of the left following the Pied Piper.
One side thinks, one side produces, the other side feels, the other side takes...

I favor Jeff's suggestion than the whole article.

The articles tries to the comprehend Bush. But Bush is Bush from the start. You know how he is. He is different individual.

He is fatherlike. His focus is his own home. America. When you hit one member of his family (9/11), sorry but he will raise all the hell to you and show you no mercy.

But he loves his children, even that child is disrespectful, ungrateful, uncontented, and rebellious (the Democrats).

Have you seen any major effort by the President to give the Democrats the dose of their own poisonous medicine? No. He doesn't retaliate even many of us try to depict how "foolish" and "stupid" he is.

Above us all, more than Obama and McCain, he has shown his maturing fatherhood.... THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

I am so proud of him! That means I will be proud of doing things of my own and shape my future and never use anyone else for my own favor. I will never be a democrat who blames even God himself of his or her own failings.

Be American! Be free and do good things for your own. No matter how small... You will be proud of yourself... and happy!

Not because you have Government. But because did like Reagan told you what to do.

DO IT YOURSELF! NEVER RELY ON A PREACHER, ESPECIALLY IF THAT PREACHER IS A POLITICIAN.

I will hate McCain if he tries to do the Obamanation thing of preaching!

People forget that Jimmy Carter really was a moderate Democrat.

Carter appointed Paul Volcker to the Fed (who fixed the inflation problem, even though Reagan got the credit), cut capital gains taxes, deregulated railroads and the airlines, and was years ahead of his time in seeing the connection between energy efficiency and national security.

So what doomed Carter's Presidency? A series of foreign policy blunders, the biggest being with Iran. All of these blunders were based on the same naive belief that there are no "bad people" in the world. He still holds this belief, which is why he talks with Hamas.

Carter's foreign policy blunders hurt him domestically as well as the Iranian Revolution brought the Iranian oil crisis.

By all indications Barack Obama holds the same naive belief about the world. That's why he wants to talk with Ahmednijad. That's the real reason why he opposed the war in Iraq. Like Carter, Obama will be loved by the world community, but is likely to make dangerous and foolish decisions that will probably harm us far more than any good he could do in office.

bubblehead, "BO is winging it! He has no more idea what he wants to do as President than I do as airline pilot."
Obama is doing whatever it takes to get elected and that makes it appear as if he is either naive or without direction, he is neither as far as he's concerned. If the McCain campaign operates on either of those assumptions Obama will set the campaign agenda on grounds that favors him. Obama knows precisely what he wants for America and with a bigger Dem majority in both houses he will get most of what he wants and most will be enough to devastate America.
Obama would like the campaign to be about his religion, his wife's radicalism, his inexperience, anything but his real policies and their probable end results. The time taken up on, religion, Michelle, values, and race leaves less time for policy and no time for the devil that dwells in the details of his vision for a new "progressive" America.