He was branded a socialist revolutionary -- taking society in a new direction. Honestly, what would have been truly radical would have been to do nothing. What he did was big and risky but not radical. Radical would have been allowing the chips to fall where they may. It would have been emotionally satisfying, and some would have preferred to risk economic depression, international bank failure, destruction of real estate, stock and who-knows-what other markets to bailouts. Mr. Obama could have stood firm and said, "I am a man of principle, and being responsible means paying the price for your mistakes." Many a man-on-the-street was calling for this approach, but it would have had radi...

He was branded a socialist revolutionary -- taking society in a new direction. Honestly, what would have been truly radical would have been to do nothing. What he did was big and risky but not radical. Radical would have been allowing the chips to fall where they may. It would have been emotionally satisfying, and some would have preferred to risk economic depression, international bank failure, destruction of real estate, stock and who-knows-what other markets to bailouts. Mr. Obama could have stood firm and said, "I am a man of principle, and being responsible means paying the price for your mistakes." Many a man-on-the-street was calling for this approach, but it would have had radical consequences.
And to health care. President Obama says, let's fix the system. A liberal vision would be the single-payer model, successfully used in Canada. It cuts costs and delivers excellent universal health care. It is tax-payer funded and not connected to employment. But the President seeks no such leap of faith from the American people. He simply wants to adjust the current system, to bend the cost curve so that public systems he inherited do not go bankrupt in ten years, and so that more people can afford health care. He doesn’t have to do this. Medicare will not go bankrupt on his watch, and any action taken to solve this problem will be unpopular in some circles as excess is taken out of the system. But acting now, instead of waiting for a crisis, is prudent. In truth, President Obama's approach is again quite cautious.

Yet look at the arguments stacked against him: "Citizenship," "Socialism," "Nazism," "government takeover," "revolutionary policies," "health care for illegal aliens," "death panels for grandma," and “take back our country.” Lively conspiracy theories, expressions of fear and its anger, and political taunts, but hardly addressable through reason.

Insecure times have brought anger and fear to the fore. Humans project their dislikes onto suitable targets, whether reasonable or not. If we do it to our relatives, colleagues and celebrities, we certainly do it to our presidents.

If President Obama were publicly casting blame on the Muslim fundamentalists or communists in our midsts, or stok...

Yet look at the arguments stacked against him: "Citizenship," "Socialism," "Nazism," "government takeover," "revolutionary policies," "health care for illegal aliens," "death panels for grandma," and “take back our country.” Lively conspiracy theories, expressions of fear and its anger, and political taunts, but hardly addressable through reason.

Insecure times have brought anger and fear to the fore. Humans project their dislikes onto suitable targets, whether reasonable or not. If we do it to our relatives, colleagues and celebrities, we certainly do it to our presidents.

If President Obama were publicly casting blame on the Muslim fundamentalists or communists in our midsts, or stoking up anger and fear of some enemy, he would channel the feelings bubbling up. Instead, he is playing the technocrat, using logic to solve problems and avoiding the messy emotions spewed about. In areas like climate change, health care and the economy, where real-world concerns need to be addressed, the work of the government is finally getting done.

But feelings of fear and anger may be unsatisfied and may exacerbate if the economy fails to improve quickly enough. Is the President, who reasons so well, who almost never shows anger, able to deal with the unreasonable?

Is reason itself an antidote or is it like bringing Kryptonite to Superman?

Opposition? Obama has opposition? For real? I don’t care if Obama gets a bucket stuck on his head and repeatedly runs into walls in front of visiting dignitaries; we need to treat him like that kid from the Twilight Zone who could send people to the cornfield and keep saying to him no matter what he does, “That’s a real smart thing you did, Obama. A real smart thing.” Otherwise, someone is going to send us to the cornfield.

By my calculation, we elected in Barack Obama, a leader who is expert
in reasoning. He distinguished himself academically to get into
Harvard law school, and there, he competed in talking and writing about
law and society to become editor-in-chief of the Harv...

Opposition? Obama has opposition? For real? I don’t care if Obama gets a bucket stuck on his head and repeatedly runs into walls in front of visiting dignitaries; we need to treat him like that kid from the Twilight Zone who could send people to the cornfield and keep saying to him no matter what he does, “That’s a real smart thing you did, Obama. A real smart thing.” Otherwise, someone is going to send us to the cornfield.

By my calculation, we elected in Barack Obama, a leader who is expert
in reasoning. He distinguished himself academically to get into
Harvard law school, and there, he competed in talking and writing about
law and society to become editor-in-chief of the Harvard Law Review.

Whoop-de-damn-do. Unfortunately, he's not qualified to work to cash register at McDonalds.

The only thing he got out of his meeting with the IOC was a coupon for five dollars off a ticket to the 2016 Olympics[/b]. And that was one of his biggest accomplishments so far.

Is reason itself an antidote or is it like bringing Kryptonite to Superman?

Good question. A lot of the "health care" Left and the "anti-false war" Left are restlessly asking the same questions.

Even, last weekend even SNL hit Obama over the head with some tough comedy. (See: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/06/cnn-fact-checks-snl-sketc_n_310841.html )

I'm afraid reason may not be as good as false personifications, smear campaigns, finger-pointing, hypocritical and/or hysterical demagoguery,etc.

Electoral politics is more like boxing rather than a group of engineers working on a design for a bridge.

On the other hand, "Professor Obama," is hip to money. He knows or f...

Is reason itself an antidote or is it like bringing Kryptonite to Superman?

Good question. A lot of the "health care" Left and the "anti-false war" Left are restlessly asking the same questions.

Even, last weekend even SNL hit Obama over the head with some tough comedy. (See: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/06/cnn-fact-checks-snl-sketc_n_310841.html )

I'm afraid reason may not be as good as false personifications, smear campaigns, finger-pointing, hypocritical and/or hysterical demagoguery,etc.

Electoral politics is more like boxing rather than a group of engineers working on a design for a bridge.

On the other hand, "Professor Obama," is hip to money. He knows or finds out where it comes from, he gets control of it, he sends it to projects he wants.

He's also hip to PR. The current high stakes battle with the generals over troop levels in Afghanistan is a prime example. If he was a weaker man and a general "leaked," or put out the idea we needed 40,000 more troops or we'd lose....most politicians would cave in.

But letting generals decide how many troops we need (for what? why?) is like letting kids decide how many toys they should get for Christmas.

Instead of just giving in to the Pentagon, Obama has Sec. of Defense Gates making statements. He has ex-General Jones National Security Advisor making statements (i.e. lets think about it properly, statements), he has Sec. of State Hillary Clinton making "let's think about it properly" statements --- rather than just being railroaded down that road.

But -- as a fervid Obama supporter -- it's reasonable for folks to be asking: "Where's the beef?" --- what's going to come out of the push for Health Care Reform, for example?

And how will the charade of getting out of Iraq go? (You know, all "combat troops," out or what?). Will Afghanistan become intended for another permanent occupation?

Why does it take more than a year to close down the torture prisons?

Etc.

Rhetoric, alone, won't ans