Make way for SENATOR Obama

On November 4, 2008, almost 70 Million Americans cast their ballots for the Democratic candidate, Senator Barack Obama, to become the next President of the United States. Many of these people chose Obama's messages of change and put in this new President, their hopes and dreams of a better day in America.

And we got the man we wanted. The problem, however, has been this. In his attempts to "build consensus", Obama has proven to be not the Presidential leader, but rather the 101st Senator from "America". His leadership on positions and issues has not come with clear messages to his party on what he'd like to pass. Rather, he's allowed the Max Baucus's and Kent Conrads to dominate the dialogue, and has catered to Ben Nelson's every need, in order to get a watered down version of whatever legislation he was originally seeking.

And Conrad, Nelson, Bayh, and Baucus have been more than happy with the circumstances--giving them the platform and clout they seek to gain fundraising for their next campaigns, appear to be "moderates" with their majority Red-state constituencies.

The problem with the current situation, however, is that Obama has a real agenda, but he's not articulated the specifics of the deals. Recently, he "wimped out" on his movement towards normalizing relations with Cuba, continuing the current relationship status for another year. Clearly this was a backpedal on an issue that would have caused waves with certain elements of the population. Why do we keep a draconian policy in place when the benefits of such actions have far outlived their usefulness? Are we anticipating an imminent attack from Havana on our shores, and all that stands in the way is that darn trade embargo?

Spare me the lecture on Castro's role in the Cuban missile crisis, or Grenada, or even Nicaragua. Clearly isolating him hasn't stopped his influence on the Hugo Chavez's of the world, and at 80+ years old, I don't think there's an imminent plan on his horizon to take over Costa Rica, or Alabama, or whatever.

Yet Obama made the move that most SENATORS would make--consensus, and give a little to get a little. No movement on this issue means keeping it off the table, while you fight for health care.

But his moves on Health Care, and even on the Stimulus, for that matter, were bold initiatives that required someone to stand up and say "this is my position! Here's why it helps the Most Americans! etc, etc". Instead Obama put the legislation ideas forward, and then let Rahm Emmanuel twist the arms, let Max Baucus and Kent Conrad drive the deal cutting where they are bargaining basically against themselves. Obama has yet to make the case to the American people that he should get his way, all soaring rhetoric to the contrary.

Without someone to stand up and say "here's what I believe in!", the only other voices out there that can be heard are the Glenn Becks, and Birthers, and the rest of the nut-jobs who need access only to a bull-horn, a cell phone camera, or a Fox News Correspondent.

Despite endless press conferences, Obama looks ever more ineffectual, ever more meek, and ever more timid in his approach to issues. We see it in business all the time. Someone gets promoted into a new role, and perhaps they are smart enough, but don't yet believe in their message, or leadership skills. They appear timid, and allow stronger personalities around them to dominate initially. It's sad, really, because Obama is the best orator in the game. The best player on the court. But he is like the kid brother who has outgrown his father, but still loses the head-to-head matches because he lets his father psyche him out.

Obama seems to be confused at this vitriol from the Republicans, and as the Independents of the nation watch to see how he reacts, they are increasingly dismayed at his lack of sturdiness. He seems easily knocked off message. Unable to do much more than deliver a line. If John Boehner, Joe Wilson, or Glen Beck can do that to Obama, what could Putin do? It's an answer the Obama camp had better come up with quick.

All that being said, I still think as President, Obama has made a lot of strategically excellent decisions. A year after Lehman Brothers collapsing, we are in much better shape economically, and fiscally, than I ever thought we'd be. Yes, we are in a deficit hole that's exceptionally large, but the alternative of depression and deflation is not the kind of movie I'd want to see. I think March of 2009 was enough of a preview for my liking.

In the end, Obama has failed to take leadership positions on major policy initiatives, from Afghanistan and Iraq, to global warming, to energy. He's tried hard, and advanced 8 efforts at the same time, but nothing has actually come to pass that would offer real change. It's like my boss tells me, "I'd rather have 100% of 3 things done than 3% of 100 things done." The point is, Obama needs to choose some initiatives, push his agenda, and get it done. The nice guy, "let the Congress sort it out" approach has led to speculation on Death Panels, socialism, and all the rest.

This Senatorial approach to running the Executive Branch has left his party confused and leaderless, and emboldened the minority party into stalmateing every initiative, or crippling them. This is the definition of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory on each legislative initiative. If Obama isn't careful, he will end up with the albatross around his neck of another nice guy but ineffectual leader--Jimmy Carter.