Who is Obama? Pragmatism makes him tough to define

WASHINGTON — A socialist? A steady hand? A sellout?

Halfway through his first term — or only term, if Republicans can eject him in the 2012 elections — President Obama's leadership style has made him something of a political enigma.

His health care law ushered in the most sweeping social legislation since the 1960s, but he abandoned the government-sponsored coverage he embraced during his campaign. His tax-cut compromise with Republicans to extend unemployment benefits and provide relief to the middle class discarded a key campaign promise to roll back Bush-era tax cuts for top earners. His Wall Street bailouts alienated some of the Main Street workers he said he was trying to help. His soaring rhetoric from the campaign often dried up during debates on health care and jobs, but it re-emerged powerfully this month as he honored the victims of the mass shooting in Tucson...

Obama "has clear policy views," says University of Chicago political scientist William Howell. But they become clouded in the public eye because "they're conjoined with a recognition that presidential power is contested ... and he gets very pragmatic very quickly."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-01-19-1Awhoisobama19_CV_N.htm?csp=34news

"He who stands for nothing will fall for anything."

:banghead:

He might know that they are one of the least effective strategies, if not the least.

its no wonder he's hard to define.

:thumbsup:
That said, he's not hard for ME to define.

He is that. He was not born yesterday.

He is, also, an adult.

The political class and the commentariat is full of 'adults in name only', who operate under the propostion: "I want what I want, and I want it now. If I do not get it, you are in trouble."

Obama is one of the very small number of responsible adults in Washington.

He does what he thinks is right, not what the pushers and shovers think he ought to do.

The pushers and shovers on the left (mainly rabble rousing bloggers excepting Bernie and a few others) don't seem to fare too well.

And the left absolutely needs MORE pushers and shovers to even come close to balancing the pushers and shovers on the right.

The President listens to all and does what he thinks is the best path forward. Sometimes demands are unrealistic and need to be put on hold.

Like prosecuting torturers.

just like the rest of them. his family (for quite a few generations) will never know privation or want. they will be venerated american royalty even if he loses in 2012.

he grabbed the golden ticket a long time ago and ran with it. he isn't any different than any other politician.

when our country needed a statesman, we got a wall streeter with the sincerity of a used car salesman. an extremely well-educated used car salesman with rhetorical skills.

plus, you and i aren't in his social class. obama and people like him get confused, scared, or feel disrespected if the help get too rowdy.

there are few exceptions, but they either get marginalized or die in plane crashes.

Ever. One of the most ignorant too.

but he is smart.

power and access to power are literally worth their weight in pallets stacked with US currency. and then some.

i look at the condition of people i can eat with and shit ain't looking too good.

the economic cleansing of american labor and the middle class is unprecedented and is supported by both sides and underwritten by industrial and commercial giants.

the same people who brought you this economy profited from all sides of the real estate heist. they were the only winners. they win when its good for them and bad for us, and it is written into the law that it will be good for them.

they will always win.

Maybe that means it might just be true.

No one twisted his arm to push for Charter schools.
No one insist he defend Bush era policies and law breaking in court.
No one insisted he appoint a deficit commission looking into entitlement cuts.
No one insisted he strike a deal with republicans extending Bush era tax cuts.
No one insisted he take the public position regulations are stifling job growth.
No one insisted he freeze public employee salaries.
No one insisted he appoint the architects of our economic downturn to his cabinet.
No one insisted he assassinate citizens without trial.
No one insisted he make teachers and their unions a target of his reforms.
No one insisted his health care law be written by industry lobbyists and patterned after the Heritage Foundation's ideas.

It's an interesting concept to explore. I think in the mind of the public it has become conflated with practicality. It's actually a specific philosophy. It's too bad there is so much turmoil here over anything that hints at a whiff of criticism of the Administration, because I'd love to find a discussion on this.

from wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatism#Influence_of_Pragmatism_in_Public_Administration

Influence of Pragmatism in Public Administration

The classical pragmatism of John Dewey, William James and Charles Sanders Peirce has influenced research in the field of Public Administration. Scholars claim classical pragmatism had a profound influence on the origin of the field of Public Administration.<17><18> At the most basic level, public administrators are responsible for making programs "work" in a pluralistic, problems oriented environment. Public administrators are also responsible for the day to day work with citizens. Dewey's participatory democracy can be applied in this environment. Dewey and James notion of theory as a tool, helps administrators craft theories to resolve policy and administrative problems. Further, the birth of American public administration coincides closely with the period of greatest influence of the classical pragmatists.

Which pragmatism (classical pragmatism or neo-pragmatism) makes the most sense in public administration has been the source of debate. The debate began when Patricia Shields introduced Dewey's notion of the Community of Inquiry.<19> Hugh Miller objected to one element of the community of inquiry (problematic situation, scientific attitude, participatory democracy) - Scientific attitude.<20> A debate that included responses from a practitioner <21>, an economist,<22> a planner,<23> other Public Administration Scholars,<24><25> and noted philosophers <26><27> followed. Miller <28> and Shields <29><30> also responded.

In addition, applied scholarship of public administration that assesses charter schools <31>,contracting out or outsourcing<32>,financial management,<33> performance measurement<34>, urban quality of life initiatives<35>, and urban planning<36> explicitly draws on the ideas of classical pragmatism in the development of the conceptual framework and focus of analysis.