Why Isn't Obama Leading from the Left?

So, here we are, on the precipice of history. Barack Obama is soon to be sworn in as President of the United States--POTUS 44 in "beltway" lingo. His election was the promise of "change" being brought to Washington. And many Liberals in this country thought that this promise was really going to be the return to the FDR policies of the past, with an iconic, Kennedy-like figure in Obama, being able to force the policies through a left-leaning, and lockstep Congress.

On the flip side, most Conservatives feared the exact same thing. After all, it was George Bush, Dick Cheney, Bill Frist, and Tom Delay who had turned on the automated fanny-kicker during most of the past decade, and now that they were out of power, they realized that they were the ones getting kicked, and they couldn't turn the damn thing off.

So, on the eve of the transition of power, in the wake of cabinet announcements, stimulus package agendas, and international crises, why is it the Liberals crying the loudest? Why do we hear Tom Harkin and John Kerry crying foul, while Mitch McConnell and John Boehner remain relatively complimentary of Obama's handling of things? Why have Conservatives smugly commented about Obama's "shift of policy" to the right?

Because there has been a misunderstanding, or more specifically, a misreading of Obama, the leader, in our society. We have spent so much time attaching our own hopes and fears to this man, that we have forgotten to take a good look at the man himself, and see how he learns, how he reacts to things, and what his core beliefs are.

Here are some characterizations that I hope people will pay attention to about the President-elect, because I think these are more telling of what kind of President we have truly elected.

1. Obama isn't an Idealogue, He's a Pragmatist--this isn't to say he doesn't have positions on major issues. It simply means that he doesn't adhere to them in a dogmatic fashion, as most ideologues (Liberal and Conservative) do. Often, this is a sign of a moderate, or someone who governs from the center. Pragmatists often look at issues in a real-time manner, select the most capable individuals to help them understand and craft a solution, and then act in a determined manner, always checking to see if the situation on the ground warrants a shift in strategy.

After 12 years of this type of behavior from the executive (Bush 41 and Clinton were both much more pragmatic), we have endured 8 years of rigid ideology and conservative dogma. And it has been disastrous. Even Reagan was civil, and made deals with Tip O'Neill in the 80's. But for 8 years, we have been led by a philosophy. And this country is NOT a monolith. Eventually, things had to change. And Change they will. When Obama says that change has come, what it really is, is a change in temperment. A change in leadership style. From a "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality, to a "think first, stay calm, move rationally" standard. This will anger many, who feel that swift reactions from the Executive show unwavering leadership. But that behavior has really led to some terrible decisions, and we are now having to deal with them.

What we have seen so far, is a President Elect who understands that he needs a team that can get things accomplished, that he must make decisions based on study, and facts, that he should be trying to reach the broadest consensus possible, and that above all, he needs to remain calm. We should all try to achieve so much in our own lives.

2. People believed the Conservative hype about Liberal Agendas--During the election, it was John McCain, and his follower's mission to get elected President. To do so, all campaign tactics were tried (to his credit, McCain did NOT play the race card, but just about all other tactics were efforted). This is basic political hardball. Nothing wrong with that.

The problem is when the people actually believe some of the hyperbole printed. My favorite was the line that "Obama was the most Liberal Senator in the Chamber". This was a laugh. How does a Senator who probably only spent about 18 months in the Senate before running for President, even have the voting record to really bear that out!? What had he really accomplished, other than Ethics Reform, and an agenda to secure loose nukes (hardly Liberal agenda points.). Everything else had been pretty much party line votes, and showed nothing of his leadership style, or even his ideology, other than he wasn't in line with George Bush. His opposition to the war (favored by most in the USA), support of Immigration reform (in line with the Bush administration), and support of smaller agenda topics like SCHIP funding really didn't give us much of anything to go on, from an ideology standpoint.

BUT, given all that, people still heard these lines from the campaign, and Conservatives shuddered that he would lead like George Bush, but from the left. Liberals secretly LOVED the notion. In reality, there was NO indication whatsoever that President Obama would lead like President Bush had. Now that Obama is behaving just as he had during the campaign people appear shocked. I think it may be time to take a look at this man's career before jumping to the conclusions that the McCain/Palin ticket did about him.

3. He learned a lesson from President Bush--One thing about Obama we HAVE learned about him, is that he studies history, and will do his best to avoid the mistakes of the past. I recently heard a Republican Strategist on Chris Matthew's "Hardball", who was asked why Obama should work with Senate and House Republicans, rather than ram his agenda down their throats. After all, Bush had been doing it for years. The strategist (who was absolutely fantastic) replied that if Obama didn't want a 25% approval rating, and to drive his party right out of office, he should take a lesson from President Bush on this.

It was one of the few times, watching these shows, that I was stunned by the brilliance of a "talking head". I think Obama has realized that leading only the 52% of the people that voted for you has a way of quickly making you very unpopular with anyone but your base. The Republicans have discovered that their base is not as large as they thought. If Obama wants to find out how small his Liberal base is, he can try to ram through every Liberal agenda point at once.

4. He learned a lesson from President Clinton--the hubris of trying to tackle major issues without consulting with the Senate and House really hurt President Clinton in his early years. His tax package, and other agenda items quickly turned his majority into a minority party, where it mostly stayed for 12 years.

People decried the selections of Joe Biden, and Rahm Emmanuel as part of the Obama team, until they started to realize that these were two of the better operators in Washington, in terms of getting agendas supported and PASSED into law quickly. After all, CHANGE has to actually be enacted in the end. Bringing in new blood is great, but Obama has learned from Bill Clinton, that bringing in newbies, and egoists who think they are smarter than the Congress is a sure fire way to get nothing done. And Obama knows that a 2009 without a Stimulus package, Energy policy, and a Health Care reform act is a failure.

So, let's keep an eye on future President Obama, and see if he is really the cool-hand Luke that I think he is. I think he will show the pragmatic leadership on foreign policy, and the deal-making capability on his domestic agenda, that will give enough people the feeling that they have participated in making this country better. I have high hopes for this change. But I am hoping for the change in TEMPERMENT that Obama can bring, more than anything.