I support President Obama 100% but my major concern is....

that he will be the next Herbert Hoover. Like Hoover, he is a brilliant man. But I wonder if he is too cautious for these times? I sense that we are not pulling out of this recession. I admit, I think it will turn into a depression. I want the President to be more serious and more daring in the reforms that are needed.

I do believe that our banking system and our economy were on verge of total collapse. It could have been worse - much, much worse. But simply saving the banks and our economic system has not made it better for the common citizen. I give the President credit for saving the banks and Wall Street.

However, I do not feel that saving Wall Street transfers to Main Street. I see them slipping back into their old game. More ponzi schemes and no reforms to prevent it from happening again. They are not investing in America or jobs for our people. They are back to accumulating wealth and buying up their competitors. They are not the friends of common citizens, in my opinion.

I am a liberal. I feel like the times call for another Roosevelt-type leader. Perhaps I am only experiencing the paranoia and fear that many other Americans are exhibiting? But, the transfer of wealth in the last 30 years needs to be reversed, in my opinion. We need jobs and security. That includes healthcare for ourselves and our families.

The slow, cautious approach of President Obama does little to allay these anxieties. Realistically, I understand that the Congress and the Senate are different now than in the times of FDR. However, it requires a leadership style to move these people off the dime. The urgency is not there. Perhaps the President has been too successful in his first 8 months? If the economy had gone south as quickly and as disastrously as folks expected, then there may have been more urgency to fix the problems?

These are very trying times. I am thankful that we do not have a George W Bush or any Republican at the helm at this time. My only concern is that if Plan A does not work, there is no Plan B. The President is a creature of the Senate. Deliberate and cautious policy making is in his DNA. Only time will tell if he is the leader that is needed or if he is the next Herbert Hoover?


peace

more fluid than most politicians, so fluid that all his detractors can lay against him is the fraudulent claim of non-citizenship, affiliation with Rev. Wright, and other superficial branding efforts.

I think the very smart money is on his re-election, on the presumption that he wants two terms, and I hope he does, and I think the GOP's rationale to oppose him is weakened every time the rightwing crazies spew their latest subversion.

Agree that History will be the judge, but History doesn't know what it's up to until it's up to it, and sometimes not even then.

I like Obama's chances for a sustained and effective presidency.

- - -

Hi, kentuck. Good to see you as always with thoughtful posts on these boards.

:thumbsup: :hi:

I appreciate that.

As someone who has read a ton of presidential history, I agree with a lot of what you've said here.

I'm curious.

existing power structures. This might be the right approach. It's too soon to say.

FDR - through legislation submitted through Sen. Robert Wagner of NY, created new power centers to compete with the old. New agencies - not just Hoover's Reconstruction and Finance Corp - and newly strengthened unions.

For this reason, all the FDR comparisons just do not make sense from the policy viewpoint.

Er, I mean ten dollar bill.
Honestly I don't know how our money has maintained any value at all. The Fed has been printing new money so fast that it should all be worthless paper. The only thing keeping us afloat now is the perception of value that folks still willing to trade in it have imparted. My thought is that if the market were to crash, so would the dollar. My fear is that if we print more money to do anything else, the jig would be up and the truth of the dollar would be known. I think this is what has tied Obama's hands more than anything else.

but you draw some incorrect conclusions from them.

You say that it could have gotten worse, and you're right. An absolute total collapse of the banking system would have created complete anarchy, and six to nine months ago, I thought that was possible. I no longer think so. While the prosperity brought to the bankers by bailouts has not trickled down to those citizens who have lost the most over the last year or so, they still have the prospect of getting a job in an economy that still stands. In the work I do for a utility company, I have had a few more people a week tell me that they can pay their bill over some time with the new job that they just got. Many have sold homes faster than they thought would be possible.

You say there are more Ponzi schemes. Other than the revelations of ones that have gone on for years, I don't see that. Bernie Madoff's essential message was, "Trust no one." I think it's going to be decades before that lesson is lost.

Wealth transfer will be reversed. You just cannot accomplish it quickly in the middle of a recession. The very tax increases used to even up the score from the Bush years are the same ones that give caution to those who would reinvest in American jobs. One of the smart things that Reagan's policy did was to provide investment tax credits and faster depreciation schedules for property purchased for use in a business. Our President may have to think along those lines, as well.

You describe the President as a creature of the Senate. I really don't think he spent enough time there to really have become steeped in its ways. One of the reasons he gave for throwing his hat into the ring in 2008 versus 2012 or 2016 was that he didn't want to become polluted by Washington culture. Enough of our fellow citizens trusted in that, to see past the claims of inexperience. President Obama knows that, and will act accordingly.

The crucial time for any Administration is that first hundred or two hundred days. After that, the forces arrayed against change have figured out where their levers are, and can start to work them. We got the budget and the stimulus through before this could happen. We may just have been too late on healthcare reform, but that is a priority that may have to wait for 2013. If the economic measures already enacted can take a fuller effect by that time, it will be easier to achieve change in a recovered economy than it is in a wounded one.

as far as, "Wealth transfer will be reversed", I have my doubts. This process has been going on for mor than thirty years. I can recall when Jimmy Carter requested labor to forestall any demands for increases in pay so as not to aggravate the "inflation" problem at that time. There was a very small, incremental increase when Clinton was President, but it has mostly been a consistent decline in wealth for most Americans.

but consider this: Not since 1963 has there been a President who was not either a Repuke or a Democratic Southerner. And if you take LBJ out of that mix, you go back to 1969 with that chain of pro-rich leaning 'leadership'. The two DLC'ers in that timeline were not progressives.

Jimmy Carter (as Governor) actually called for Georgians to leave their headlights on in support of William Calley, right after the truth started coming out about My Lai. Can anyone imagine Barack Obama doing that? Saying that we're not going to prosecute people who followed the rules they were given is not the same thing as lionizing them for the evil they did.

Bill Clinton's signature is still visible on DOMA. He was willing to make whatever compromises with evil that he needed to, to accomplish what he wanted.

Fortunately, we've broken that string. It will take more than six months to undo four decades of damage.

But time waits for no man.

It took FDR quite some time to turn the US economy around after the damage of Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover. We stand on a stronger base than FDR did in 1933, we have not suffered the devastation that three years of the Great Depression had already wrought.

Leonardo DaVinci said that, I agree, and Calley was put on trial. He served three years of a life sentence, a farce, but not nearly the farce that is going on now, where the criminals are being left unscathed to allow them further crimes in the future. My Lai was investigated, photos were not repressed as Obama does with the current killers.

and there will be low-level soldiers put on trial, just as the Abu Ghraib torturers were. The thing that caught Calley was that My Lai came out just as popular revulsion for the war had reached a fever pitch.

The "surge" and it's associated bullshit stories have been successful PR ventures to keep Vietnam-era opposition down to a minimum.

I keep thinking of the primary and how Obama never got excited but just kept his eye on the ball with slow and steady. I guess I still have hope.

It's premature at this point to place him in historical context.

But, if I were to draw a comparison to any president, at this point, it would be Lincoln, not Hoover.

Why?

Contemplative, deep thinkers, dedicated to the Constitution, dedicated to the *idea* of national unity, perhaps a little slow to act - but tend to wait and see how events play out. Both tend to be seemingly naively bipartisan, but also very smart, shrewd and prone to underestimation by others.

I have more to write but I have to think on it more.

It's the "slow to act" that causes concern. I'm sure President Obama has all the qualities you mention.

and Hoover is not.

Businesses won't begin to rehire until they are confident they need to, and consumer demand increases. I also think they are resisting hiring until they know how the health insurance issue gets resolved. There is plenty of evidence that business resists hiring because of the cost of health care. The initial focus on insurance has overlooked the cost containment needed in the delivery of health care. The Massachusetts plan is a good example. they got 97% of their citizens covered but have run into the problem of cost overruns and a shortage of primary care doctors. The careful deliberations have brought out this issue and the president and congress are now trying to consider their lesson in a national plan.

I wouldn't describe Obama's approach as "slow and cautious" I think that is a myth. He has moved remarkable quick on many issues in his first six months, and to got this difficult health care issue on the table and pushed congress to get a bill before the break. I would describe his style more as inclusive,strategic,and persistent. The division of the Democrats into progressives and blue dogs has created a problem in moving legislation forward quickly. He is not a dictator, and must rely on the messy deliberations of congress and democracy to lead. I prefer this to Bush's dictatorial style that simply ignored half the country. I do think however that once all sides have a chance to air their concerns and then dispelling falsehoods of the opposition, this will eventually get a bill that will meet his stated objectives.

Here's is a very enlightening article that reflects Obama's approach: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/01/26/090126fa_fact_gawande?currentPage=all

I agree with your assessments however, there is not a lot of optimism about jobs coming back. We are in for a long dry spell when it comes to jobs, in my opinion. I believe we were hurt a lot by the NAFTA and GATT and other trade treaties. We gave away our jobs for the benefit of the corporations, so they could maximize their profits with lower labor costs. It's going to take a good spell to recover from that, in my opinion.

On top of that, we are not out of the woods as far as the financial crisis goes. There are reports that the commercial bankruptcies ahead are even more serious than the present housing crisis. Much of it has to do with consumer confidence. It is good that people did not lose everything in their 401K's. They should thank Obama for that. They could be broke.

We have been living large on borrowed money. Some 13 trillion dollars of assets has evaporated, and that won't be coming back anytime soon. I believe that is why Obama has pushed for a green jobs revolution to spur new jobs and stabilize and ultimately lower our energy costs. It will take time, but the seeds are there for jobs that are good paying and many that can't be outsourced. He's also been working on removing the tax benefits for corporations shipping job overseas. Patience is difficult when so many have lost jobs and are hurting, but the ship has been grounded by Bushco, and it's going to take a lot of work and time to get us sailing again.

Well said.

It is going to take a long time to get this ship back into the water. The damage done in the last eight years is immeasurable. Those that ignore that fact are living in a fantasy world.