Around the Virtual Watercooler

Here is an excerpted virtual conversation I had with friends today. The subject, mostly, is whether or not President Obama is up to the job, and if not, why not? Names are changed to protect the intelligent:

Marie:

My Off Times Square question du jour is “Does Obama Really Mean It?” Will he really fight for progressive ideals or is he just shitting us the way he did in 2008?

Aphrodite (part of this response follows an earlier thread):

I think the most likely reason the Bush war crimes were never prosecuted is that Congress has dirty hands too.  They were briefed.... maybe not the whole story but enough so they are accessories after, even during, the fact.  Pelosi made it clear that impeachment was off the table.  The corruption in the Bush Justice Dept. ran deep too, and doubtless vestiges of it still exist.  There is a cover-up of the cover-up.  Holder is less than useless. And Obama?  Add weakness and inexperience into the mix.  The generals rule him, so wouldn't be surprised if the CIA does too.

Apollo:

I think we were all way to happy to be rid of Bush to see that Obama was just not ready for this job. He was a great campaigner, but as a president? I think he's a middle of the roader. Granted, if we're honest, we have to admit he did a few good things. But it was the way he did them and the fact that had he been more forceful and hit the ground running with a staff that wasn't ready to stab him in the back (Summers, et al) and question his manhood (because Larry is such a stud) and if he had been ready to fight back against the kind of evil that Bush and company spread across the land, he could have been one of the truly great presidents. I remember Clinton once complaining that he never had the kind of opportunities that presidents need (crises, wars, etc) that thrust them into the ranks of the great. I think he's right on that one. Of course Clinton deep sixed himself on many scores as well. There was no lack of hubris there. But he had no problem going toe to toe with the execrable Newtie when Gingrich shut down the government. Obama would have asked permission to please can he keep the lights on in the White House because his kids have homework to do.

Obama was never the guy we all hoped he'd be. Probably not even the guy HE hoped he'd be.  And I have to agree with Marie who recently said something along the lines of him not being able to change who he is at this late date.  I think those kinds of change are possible. Asclepius [see below] could probably describe the technical apparatus behind life-changing psychological change (such as losing a loved one in a horrible way, or falling in love), the kind that come either from trauma or from some kind of massively epiphanous events. God knows there have been enough of those events over the last 3 years but none of them appear to have penetrated the Obama dome just yet. So, no, I don't think he'll be changing anytime soon.

So, I think this latest gambit is just that. Although "gambit" might be a little too aggressive a term. In chess one attempts a gambit with the idea of following through with any opening that may occur in your opponent's game plan. Obama has had any number of chances to plunge into the breach but each time he's decided it would be better to let his enemies carry away their wounded and rebuild their defenses. It reminds me of the maddening intransigence of the civil war general McClellan who ran the Army of the Potomac, preferring to drill and practice at war for month after month while incredible opportunities to strike at the heart of confederate troops passed him by. When his patience had finally run out, Lincoln sent McClellan a telegram saying "General, if you are not going to use your troops, I'd like to borrow them for a while."

I feel the same way about Obama. If he's not going to use his position as President, use the bully pulpit, and the FUCKING FOLLOW THROUGH ON THE GODDAM FUCKING RHETORIC....I'd  like to use it for just a month. I would leave a bloody trail through the ranks of these traitorous goddam fucking Republicans. "Pyhrric victory" I hear someone saying? Fucking right. I'd take any victory right now just as long as I take some of those pig-faced lying traitors down with me.

Marie:

Someone quoted in a news article (I’m a lot of help – can’t remember the article; can’t remember the someone) said Obama believed in a Washington that just doesn’t exist – where reasonable people sit down and work out reasonable solutions to the nation’s problems. I think that guy was right. Obama thought he could wave his magical presidential powers wand & charm a bunch of hardline, fuck-you-all-I’m-in-it-for-myself officially elected sociopaths just as he charmed millions of American people, including me. Rhetoric gets you elected; hardball gets your policies passed. Obama is like the Robert Redford character in “The Candidate” who says as the end of the film, after he’s just been elected, “Now what do I do?” Obama had no fucking idea – just dreams of getting his minions to send him daily to-do lists so he could solve the problems, one-by-one. His first full day’s schedule probably looked like this:

(1) Work out with Michelle in White House personal gym. (1 hour)

(2) Call world leaders. Accept congratulations. (2 hours)

(3) Call Mitch McConnell. Get him to agree to stimulus bill. Remind him to get his caucus behind him. Accept congratulations. (30 min.)

(4) Get Chief Justice Roberts over here to re-administer the oath. Accept congratulations. Pose for photo with CJ Fuck-Up. (10 min.)

(5) Play a little B-ball (1 hour)

(6) Have an apple & some cottage cheese. (15 min.)

(7) Close Gitmo. (5 min.)

(8) Call Wall Street CEOs. Tell them to quit giving themselves big bonuses, stop making those crooked deals, & start lending more. Accept congratulations. Hit them up for 2012. (1 1/2 hours)

(9) Talk to the kids about how their school day went. Congratulate them on doing so well. Show them the secret panel in the Oval Office desk. (15 min.)

(10) Tell Geithner to put those fucking banks in receivership & make sure there are no presidential fingerprints on the move. Give Geithner some public relations pointers. (15 min.)

(11) Stop by the Lincoln Memorial & ask Lincoln why he thought the job was so tough. Thank Secret Service detail. (30 min.)

Somehow it didn’t work out that way.

Aphrodite:

I read somewhere (forget where) that since Biden will be too old to run for president in five years, he will step down and become Sec. of State.  And that Obama will ask Xavier Becerra to be his running mate to get the dwindling Hispanic support back, especially given that Marco Rubio may be no. 2 on the GOP ticket.  This would set Becerra up to run in 2016 and snag the vote of the fast growing demographic in the USA.  And I betcha Hillary is on the short list for Supreme Court.

Apollo:

Hillary on the Supreme Court.....hmmm. I guess it would allow her to drop her pretense of being a war loving demagogue as she was during Bush II, if it was a pretense. When you're on the court you can just be your own true self. Like Sam Alito is an asshole and John Roberts is a lying piece of shit and Clarence Thomas is a far-right extremist who sleeps his way through arguments and the Dark Lord is a smug, know-it-all far right-wing wise ass, and....

Well, you get the idea.

It's not that I think it would be a bad idea. I think she might make a fine justice. Politically she might be one of the few Democrats who could make the cut seeing as Republicans would lambaste anyone without her political pedigree and connections whom they thought might actually rule in favor of actual justice rather than right-wing expediency. Hillary has worked hard at building connections across the aisle. But even those connections would evaporate in a congress ruled by the Issas and Ryans and Bachmanns, not to mention the Lil' Randys [Paul] in the senate who would vote against anyone who didn't masturbate to Ayn Rand.

Marie, too bad that list [above] is probably close to Obama's actual fantasy of day one.

Marie:

I see no chance of Hillary’s being nominated to the Court. Because of Washington acrimony, presidents have to nominate young candidates; they don’t have the luxury of giving their cronies Lifetime Achievement Awards. I haven’t done the statistics, but it’s a sure bet that turnover on the Court today is way lower than it ever has been. Of course people died younger in the old days (tho that was less true of people who could afford the best health care of the day), so you’d have to factor all that in. But still. Probably half of Americans weren’t even born when Scalia took the oath. Haven’t done the demographics there, either.

Apollo:

The biggest problem, as I see it, for us, is what, or who, next? If the political pendulum swings the way it usually does (and since Reagan, that pendulum swings much farther to the right with every cycle) we will have a Repuke president in five years. Five more years for Obama to hem and haw and let the Tea Party set the agenda. His eight years will end with some kind of dramatic flourish, something he can highlight in his memoirs, or more depressingly, it will end in disaster, despondency, spiritual destitution. And what will he say then?

"Apres moi, le deluge" would probably be appropriate. And truthful.

For who do the Democrats have in the wings? Hillary will be too old. Biden? LMAO. Who? There are no rising stars, even no faux stars a la Bobby Jindal. At one point I thought Jim Webb might be someone we could look to but I haven't heard a word from him in years.

So what we have to look forward to is one of the intellectual dwarfs now running on the Repuke side. Or someone even worse.

There will be no appetite for another Democratic president after this guy is through. None. So thank you for that, Mr. President.

Asclepius (weighing in late in the conversation [doctors are always late]):

Re: Obama's character and ability to change, the way I see it is that he has the temperament and intelligence of an excellent constitutional law professor, but not of a savvy, down in the dirt pol -- which, of course is exactly what he needs to be. He just does not have the guts for dirty fights, and what a shame that he needs to. But he does.

I think Obama is basically his mother's son.  She was a scholar and mediator par excellence. However, she was quite impractical in many ways and found it hard to stay focused. She was loved and honored for her fairness and decency and her ability to research and write simply and beautifully about the importance of craftmaking in the  Indonesian culture, especially among the women, who had for generations sustained their families and contribute to their culture. She  researched endlessly about the various villages and their differing customs and contributions. Some say she probably got too nitty-gritty. But that was her passion. She also "held court" among expatriates and Indonesians alike -- which is a bit what Barry enjoys doing. And she always stayed above the fray as a non-judgmental, tolerant role-model.

Obama inherited his mother's fluency and ability to write beautifully, and I think her values. However, he had no useful male role model, so never learned to deal with bullies who tormented him, much less bullies who were supposed to serve him -- i.e., Larry Summers. I do not think it is in his nature to be a warrior (as Hillary is) and all the male Republican candidates are, with the exception of Rick Santorum (who is just a wart).  He is a good strategist about things he deems important and stays on course like a laser beam -- think bin Laden. But he can't seem to grasp the concept and necessity of fighting the foe every day, and is unable to get his own hands dirty, although he is certainly able to let others do it for him. So ... he depends on his silver tongue and golden rhetoric to "play dirty," and we have seen how ineffectual that is.

I do think he has the news about the Republicans, but it remains to be seen whether he will just travel around and speechify to the American people about how obstructive "those people" are or whether he can take his silver tongue to the Hill and smite down the toads. I'm not very hopeful. The Bully Pulpit should be his strong suit, but he cannot manage the necessary strong or vile language!

The other part of Barry's character is the genetic inheritance from his ambitious, overly confident father -- a crazy alcoholic with hubris coming out of every pore. Put that together with his mediating professorial style and  essential decency and -- yikes. Not a fit.

I agree with Marie that he cannot change who he is. None of us can, really. We can change our perspective, come to new understandings, and gain wisdom (or not), but we cannot change our essential temperament. Whatever repetoire we learn and put into practice will be in our own style.