A perspective, not an accusation

In arguing specifics I find that my disagreements often boil down to one b-r-o-a-d disagreement about the potentialities of Obama's presidency.

During the campaign John McCain argues for a government spending freeze. This was probably the single craziest campaign promise of my life-time. It was a call for global depression.

Had McCain run on nuking Denver it would have made about as much sense.

Since it was a campaign Obama had to finesse the issue.

But once he won it was--in my view--the time to reshape the electorate's sensibilities.

The problem is that giving lip-service to ideas that are equivalent to nuking Denver will catch up with you.

All the talk about what congress would have accepted or what the public would have accepted assume that congress and the public are static by definition.

Since nobody has entered office in such a crisis or with more hope and goodwill since FDR, Obama had an opportunity to change the public and congress, rather than playing artful dodger, chess-gaming their existing attitudes.

Artful dodging is what Clinton did and we ar all aware of its limitations. Clinton was good at it, and it was often appropriate for the time, which was pretty quiet compared to today. And Clinton never had a moment like Obama had, with the very foundations of the system in flux.

Obama did not (and does not) have to be Clintonesque, in that way.

When a president steps into a crisis he has a chance to reshuffle the deck, not merely make the cleverest use of the cards on the table.

Or at least that is my perception.

contributed to the Economical Meltdown facing Obama.

I hope Obama keeps this in mind and recognizes some of
his most important advisors were in Clinton Administration
at the time.

This is not bashing Clinton. I supported Clinton and
was happy with him as our President.

No President is perfect--no one is perfect. We all make
mistakes. Try to learn from others' and do not repeat
the same mistakes. Understand the mindset of your advisors
and take that into account as one arrives at decisions.

Year. I mean correct me if I m wrong and his approval was not great until he left office. Don't get me wrong I am not bashing Clinton but he is a strange example to bring up given the tough time he had passing his agenda and the unrelenting smear campaign against him.

I was saying that Clinton skated and dodged because he had to but that Obama entered office in conditions that allowed--even demanded--seeking to change fundamental (destructive) attitudes rather than simply accepting them.

Clinton never had an opportunity to shake things up like Obama had and has.

Obama could/can do things Clinton could never have done because their circumstances are different.

So my call is for Obama to be less like Clinton, not more like him.