Barnacle on MSNBC wants Obama to be LBJ in dealing with Congress

LBJ worked on that persona his whole political life. As if Obama would hear Barnacle and start hauling people into the john with him when he goes to take a ...

I can't even begin to imagine Obama = LBJ.

He enjoyed helping people change their minds. :evilgrin: Dana ; )

Obama has more finesse... And a higher IQ...

or else he will be called angry, arrogant, out of control, tumultuous etc. LBJ and other white presidents can easily get away with public strong arming, Obama cannot.

Its the Jackie Robinson thing.

first, LBJ had years in Congress, as the majority leader, with experience in give and take. He knew what it would take to pass a bill, to remove objections. Obama has none of this.

Second - the Internet, YouTube, cell phones with cameras. You cannot deal in secret anymore. Politicians are afraid to go against their masters, look how many Republicans went to Limpdick to ask for his forgiveness.

Look at the Town hall from hell!

It used to be that our representatives believed in their conviction, even if some of their constituents were against their vote. Now, whatever they say or do or write immediately become a "viral" video. They and their families get harassed and maligned.

Obama has advisors that know the legislative process just as well as Johnson did, Rahm in particular.

other legislators with his infamous "I got his pecker in my pocket." He did not send advisers, and he could tell Joe Schmo: remember in 1958 when you wanted this and I gave it to you? Now it is your turn.

Or, remember that party with that blond? I've never told your wife...

He had the strength of his personality, not anyone else. Look at the photos, above, to get the picture. And, yes, his towering over added. Rahm, now..

It's not rocket science by any stretch of the imagination. And if they don't have that information then legislative affairs isn't doing their jobs.

He thought "blue" was more important than "true".

I'm afraid that Mike Barnacle has forgotten, or doesn't know, how much went wrong there. LBJ was too much in a hurry, didn't want to be defeated by the AMA the way Truman had been. So he gave in to the doctors' lobby on the critical issue of cost oversight. The effects were very bad, and LBJ wanted to undo some of it. But he could not.

So the budgetary problem got worse and worse, but precisely because it was so profitable to the doctors and the hospitals and the nursing homes, the counter-lobby was extremely aggressive in preventing change. The insurance companies were more submissive to doctors in those days too. So it wasn't until much later that there we finally got some alterations to the original legislation, unsatisfactory though they've been.

And now the Democrats have again been making critical concessions to lobbyists on this legislation. So I have to disagree with Mike B. We need less LBJ, and much more discussion.

(Thanks for the cute photos.)

The assumption it would work for every president is just plain faulty.