Obama is crucified because of "big government spending" -- he proposes a

freeze, and the same people are outraged.

I don't know how I feel about the freeze and that's not the point. The point is, the guy is between a rock and a hard place. What a mess.

Rant off, I guess.

In greater society, these people are called psychopaths.

He doesn't have to be between a rock and hard place if he honors the people who voted a Democrat into the Presidency, instead of trying to satisfy those who are trying to take him down. We had an election between the two parties already. We won. That means either the rock, or the hard place can go away for four years.

to still get bipartisan support.

I've heard some Reps (please don't ask me who) complain about the freeze, but then, that's part of the New Rule: Whatever Obama proposes, do not support it.

The reason we have elections is so we can choose to go with a certain ideology over a recently failed one. We chose a new direction, and Obama refuses to budge an inch in that direction. I don't know whether it's a lack of courage, conviction, or principles, but it's not good, whatever it is.

be so cautious, or whatever the word should be. I like the idea of bipartisanship in theory, but it just isn't possible these days, as you well know.

his own supporters and the opposition party. That's not a confusing place all, for anyone who actually wants to represent their supporters.

Of *course* the opposition party is going to criticize him. That's what they're supposed to do. They're supposed to have a different, irreconcilable agenda. The problem here is that Obama's agenda isn't all that different from the opposition party, and he can't sell it to his supporters.

He's listening to the wrong people.

F**k pandering to the "moderates". Just do what we elected you to do.

Absent any new information, the decision made should remain -- if it was good yesterday, and nothing about it changes today, it is a wise decision for tomorrow, too.

Mr Lincoln was once criticized for being too slow to make a decision. By way of explanation, he told his critics: "I may walk slow but I never walk back."

I don't expect or want Mr Obama to be pigheaded like George W and never question (let alone change) a decision. When facts change, opinions change. Nothing mushy about that. But in instances where all that differs are extraneous issues of no direct consequence, or simply the tenor of the critique, then the validity of the original decision should be reaffirmed and not cast aside for seemingly short-term gain, or worse, in a vain attempt to improve electoral prospects.

Afghanistan, regardless of the criticisms for doing so. (Unfortunately, he didn't ask US, otherwise we wouldn't be sending more troops :7)

And because of that willingness, I have cautious faith that he would also not hesitate to change a decision should the facts warrant it.