It will take more than a speech to restore faith in Obama

[babsbunny]

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/09/08/westen.obama/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

By Drew Westen, Special to CNN
September 9, 2011 8:24 a.m. EDT

Editor's note: Drew Westen is professor of psychology and psychiatry at Emory University and founder of Westen Strategies, a strategic messaging firm. His is the author of "The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Nation." He has been a consultant or adviser to several candidates, and he informally advised the Barack Obama campaign in 2008.

Atlanta (CNN) -- About a month ago, the dams finally burst as commentators gave voice to the concern building for some time among everyday Americans: Did we elect a president who just doesn't have what it takes to lead?

The president had just struck what was perhaps the most destructive of his one-sided compromises with the Republicans, agreeing to cut the deficit by requiring "shared sacrifice" from everyone -- seniors, the already-struggling middle class, people who had lost their jobs -- everyone, that is, except millionaires and billionaires, Wall Street speculators and oil companies.

[MichiganVote]

1. Must tax the wealthy. No faith in Washington DC till then.

[slay]

2. Indeed

we've been waiting and waiting and waiting for positive action from him. and i have a feeling we'll keep waiting and waiting and waiting... :(

[rsmith6621]

3. Follow My Mantra......

I have been posting the below here on the DU for some time.

.....Actions Not Words Mr. President...

[emilyg]

13. Amen.

[Tarheel_Dem]

4. And it'll take more than a snarky opinion piece to diminish my support for Obama.

:hi:

[Whisp]

14. yep.

:thumbsup:

I always believe everything CNN spouts. :D

[vaberella]

35. +1. n/t

[treestar]

39. +1

:hi:

[ProSense]

5. Westen won’t leave well enough alone

Steve Benen: Westen won’t leave well enough alone

<...>

Westen continues to defend his premise, though, and wrote another lengthy piece for CNN. Jonathan Bernstein notes a few of the problems with Westen’s latest effort, but there was a separate flaw that caught my eye.

<...>
It’s hard to overstate how wrong this is, and only reinforces the larger concerns about Westen’s thesis.

First, the notion that Congress approved “virtually every piece of legislation” Bush proposed isn’t even close to being accurate. The failed former president had a handful of legislative accomplishments — most notably, No Child Left Behind, Medicare Part D, and the creation of a new cabinet agency — but these successes were largely on Democratic issues, expanded government, and came after the White House made all kinds of compromises (the kind of compromises Westen now believes Obama shouldn’t be making, and wouldn’t have to make if he told better “stories”). What’s more, they came in Bush’s first term, which was followed by an accomplishment-free second term. To argue that Bush batted 1.000 with Congress is silly.

Second, the idea that Bush racked up this non-existent record of accomplishments by occasionally appealing to the public when Congress balked is simply untrue. The only meaningful policy initiative Bush took to the electorate to rally support was his plan to privatize Social Security. If memory serves, the effort didn’t go well.

<...>

[ProSense]

9. Oh, I forgot to point out the stunning irony:

First the title of Westen's piece: It will take more than a speech to restore faith in Obama

He then goes on to say:

<...>

A fourth attack on critics of the president -- and particularly on his unwillingness to offer a compelling story about what happened to the economy, who crashed it and how he planned to fix it -- has been to parody critics as believing in a "magic wand" theory, in which all Obama needed was to wave a magic wand and give a pretty speech, and the Red Sea would part. According to this argument, there is little one man can do, and the quality of a president's oratory is of little consequence to his leadership.

The argument that great oratorical powers have little or no impact on the course of events would have come as a surprise to Franklin Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan, who both changed American politics for decades with their capacity to reassure the American people and to offer a new vision of government -- in one case of an active government that could make people's lives better and in the other of a bloated government that was picking their pockets.

The "oratory is irrelevant" argument is especially peculiar in the case of Obama, whose soaring oratory is precisely what won him the presidency, particularly in the face of a thin résumé. It would be difficult to argue that candidate Obama would have ever become President Obama had he not delivered his race speech in Philadelphia, which put an end to the Rev. Wright controversy and breathed new life into his campaign.

<...>

Yikes!

:rofl:

[CakeGrrl]

11. Maybe he's trying to say oratory is great...except when Obama uses it.

Or maybe he doesn't care about contradicting himself and is just trying to slap at Obama because he reads too much FDL and is convinced that the President is "just not that into him".

Another one nipping at the President's heels. No shortage of them.

[rury]

17. K&R Prosense

Damn....there are so many people on this board who blame President Obama forever fucking thing that's wrong in this country.
They act as though he's a god, a king or a dictator who can ignore Congress and do whatever the hell he wants.
ignorant, hateful posters!


OBAMA 2012!!!!!!!!

[lumpy]

21. I rather think that hate can take over when people dwell on

negativity and are looking for someone to blame. Too many people lose the argument for criticism when they resort to using accusatory terms and accusations of malfeasance. It can add up to hate.

[Autumn]

6. K/R Sounds like an article written by someone who

reads DU. All the excuses are there. I like this guy, he makes a lot of sense.

[tblue]

7. Not for everybody.

For many, it was a homerun, and they are so happy we got a speech.

[Exilednight]

22. I can see the t-shirts now. "I elected Obama to run a country, and all I got was a pretty speech"

[jefferson_dem]

29. How about "Progress? Meh." on the front.

"Gimme my pony!" on the back.

That's right. I used the "p word". Forgive me, it fits.

[CakeGrrl]

8. Unrec. More blah-blah from the

"What Happened to Obama?" head-shrink that had the anti-Obama crowd salivating.

He's pushing more of the same buttons - 'Oh noes, Obama's weak!'

Pass.

[YellowCosmicSun]

10. You're right, some will hate him no matter what.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FrenchieCat]

15. I'm sick and tired of this shit!

The corporate media thanks you! :hi:


An alternative view for those who can stomach such things!: http://www.democratsforprogress.com/2011/09/11/misinterpreting-a-man%E2%80%99s-strength-as-weakness-is-our-weakness-not-his/

[rury]

16. And it will take more than a bullshit op like this to shake my faith in

President Obama.
The writer should try persuade congress to raise taxes on the wealthy and pass the jobs bill right now.
President Obama has already told them so and the ball's in their court.

[rury]

18. Damn...I meant to unrec this pos but accidentally recced

Piece of shit worthless op!!

[JoePhilly]

19. "Bully Pulpit!!", "Pretty speech!", "Bully Pulpit!!", "Pretty speech!", "Bully Pulpit!!", "Pretty sp

[Number23]

24. Yep. Westen wrote a weird piece last month

Of course, it sat atop the Greatest Page even though it was obvious 2/3 of the folks loving it had no idea what the hell it was even about.

Basically, his entire premise boils down to "Obama talks too much, but yet not enough." He sounds like Chief Wiggam when talking to Ralph:

"If your nose starts bleeding, it means you're picking it too much. Or not enough."

[treestar]

40. +1000

ODS at work; doesn't matter what it is; it isn't good enough.

[secondwind]

20. Unrec'd.... am getting tired of so much anti-Obama stuff around here.

[Pisces]

23. + 1000.

[bhikkhu]

25. Faith is unneeded - how about cooperation toward common goals?

The media seems way too prone to frame things in religious or cultish terms. Nobody asked for faith, not now, and not during the campaign; what the president asked for was that we put aside our differences and work together toward common goals. That doesn't sell much copy, I imagine.

[Carolina]

26. K&R!

I'm sure BHO apologists on DU will chime in with a the cacophony of excuses, too. But this article nails it with the closing commrnt: "The reality is that if a president requires this many apologies, perhaps his advocates should ask whether it his leadership that is sorry."

Touche! Thanks for posting, babsbunny. :hi:

[ClarkUSA]

27. It will take more than an op-ed by a pop psychologist to undermine faith in the POTUS who nailed OBL

On the tenth anniversary of 9/11, we New Yorkers know better than Obama bashers who's been doing a damned good job of leading this country.

I'm surprised you don't. But then again, you never do.

[jefferson_dem]

28. Westen is a real hoot.

After spending two years trumpeting the reductionary thesis that Obama desperately needs a quality narrative, he's suddenly acknowledging that "It will take more than a speech to restore faith in Obama". Yet people still wonder why critics like Westen are not taken seriously.

[frazzled]

30. Oh god, not Drew Westen again

Puh-leeze. I thought we put this nobody to rest a few months ago.

As an aside: I find it amusing that so many call for "more than a speech" from the president but put their total faith in anybody who expresses an opinion with speech (Sanders, Grayson, etc.) but has never actually governed or even passed a bill with their name on it. They hypothetical speechmakers are so cool.

[jefferson_dem]

31. And recall Westen's much heralded NYT Op-Ed was all about how Obama needs to tell better stories.

Now, he's whining about how a speech is not enough (as if anyone is arguing that it is). What a tool.

[CakeGrrl]

32. EXACTLY. There's so much talk about people who should primary the President,

but on what basis do people believe any of these challengers would do such a bang-up job in the White House when none of them have held the job before and none of them have made executive decisions before?

Gee, I guess one would have to go by what they SAY they would do, when they give a SPEECH about it.

Yes, the hypocrisy. Or double standard.

[SwampG8r]

33. if we elect a liberal dem

congress our faith wont be an issue
i have faith in myself

[vaberella]

36. It shocked me a bit about people talking about a Liberal Dem congress.

When I talked about that and posted on it endlessly---to the point I was asking for help in setting a site about liberal candidates----doesn't have to be Dems----no one cared---they'd rather spend their timing saying the problem is more so Obama than Congress. As though Obama was sorted when he had a Dem congress---it was full of Conservadems who wanted to fuck him over like Lincoln and the such. Now people are talking about this a bit more...But maybe it's because it comes out of the mouth of a so-called "Obama cheerleader" so it was irrelevant.

[SwampG8r]

38. if you are right you are right

but if people are finally coming around to your way of thinking isnt now the time to push even harder?
the whole cheerleader/basher meme is holding us all back
if we agree on 99% do we have a problem?
how about 95%
we are past time where cheerleader/basher means anything

[vaberella]

34. For some. For me...I've always had faith in him and always will.

You can keep pushing your meme.

[golfguru]

37. Obama is playing it smart by moving towards center

He has correctly figured out that the left will vote for him 90% regardless. He needs the centrist vote to get re-elected. This man is no dummy. If he goes hard left, he is likely to lose in 2012.