Getting to Know Obama

The sides we're just starting to see

By Jacob Weisberg | NEWSWEEK
Published May 16, 2009
From the magazine issue dated May 25, 2009

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: thehappyamerican @ 08/06/2009 12:54:16 PM

    Another Clinton Focus Group poller! What happened to change?

    He may next issue out Obamanoculars to radical liberals to spy on their conservative neighbors! Obamanoculars with a new logo or emblem so illiterate constituents might dog-whistle in on what the new program is, to keep radicles marching in lock step!

  • Posted By: John Dough @ 05/27/2009 7:09:06 AM

    Obama is an arrogant I'm right you're wrong far left liberal socialist. He has now gone to Las Vegas to campaign for that loser Harry Reid and try to shore up support after arrogantly dissing Las Vegas and seeing his own poll numbers slide in that state. His visit is purely an attempt too shore up his ffailing numbers there. The people of Nevada are not dumb just remember his remarks at the ballot box.

    • Posted By: Hagbard Celine @ 08/05/2009 2:40:45 PM

      "Obama is an arrogant I'm right you're wrong far left liberal socialist. "

      HAR HAR! Socialist, my ass. Follow the money...he's just another corporate whore.

  • Posted By: PacificGatePost @ 05/27/2009 2:10:44 PM

    Obama continues to tell each audience what it wants to hear, but the dishing out of the stimulus money is backfiring audibly.

    http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2009/05/obamas-not-so-free-money.html

    His stimulus money is not so free.

  • Posted By: DuaneLeeC @ 05/27/2009 12:25:05 PM

    I first wondered after the election, if the news media had become so powerful that they could not be stopped. They had just managed to topple the ruling party (Republicans) of the most powerful nation on the earth. My first thoughts were that, this much power would not just vanish. That this powerful force (media) would now turn on their appointed one (our very inexperienced President) and consume him. But I have just realized how they want this to play out. As soon as it was known there was going to be an opening on the Supreme Court, they told us President Obama would select Sotomayor, and a few weeks later he did. So now I see this new power struggle playing out this way....They will attempt to run this country through their "mouthpiece" the President. This is dangerous on so many levels, not the least of is the tightrope President Obama must walk. On one side is this monster, the media ready to devour him, on the other is his own strong will and the power to stand up and say "I'm the President". When this happens, the media frenzy will be furious and fast, and we will all be at risk. I think he is smart enough to realize that they did this for him, but has he realized yet that he is not in charge??

  • Posted By: gregcovert @ 05/17/2009 9:26:00 AM

    I agree with some of your article. It could have been a little more indepth, but you gave some decent insights. I have one more category to add to your article:

    Appeaser-in-Chief: His conduct on his recent trip overseas has convinced me that he is not an adequate representative of the United States of America collectively or of me personally. He is so obsessed with appeasing the Europeans and the Muslim world that he has abdicated the responsibilities of the President. He is responsible to the citizens of the United States. I personally resent that he goes around the world apologizing for the U.S. What does he think the First World War and the Second World War were all about if not the consideration of the peoples of Europe? What does he think the Marshall Plan was all about? Does he not understand or know the history of the 20th century? Has he not read the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution. This country was founded on Judeo-Christian ethics and the principles governing this country, Does he not understand this? His bowing to the king of Saudi Arabia is an affront to all Americans. Our President does not bow down to anyone, let alone the king of Saudi Arabia. He didn???t show Great Britain, our best and one of our oldest allies, the respect they deserve, yet he bows down to the king of Saudi Arabia. He can???t find the time to visit the graves of our greatest generation because he doesn???t want to offend the Germans but make time to visit a mosque in Turkey. He offended our dead and every veteran when he gave the Germans more respect than the people who saved the German people from themselves. I am convinced that he and the members of his administration have the historical and intellectual depth of a mud puddle and should be ashamed of themselves, He is so self-righteously offended by the big bankers and the American automobile manufacturers yet do nothing about the real thieves in this situation, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Frank, Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelic, the Fannie Mae bonuses, and the Freddie Mac bonuses. What about the U.S. House members passing out $9.1 million in bonuses to their staff members ??? on top of the $2.5 million in automatic pay raises that lawmakers gave themselves? I understand the average House aide got a 17% bonus. I surely didn???t! Executives at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will be receiving $210 million in bonuses over an eighteen-month period, that's $45 million more than the AIG bonuses. In fact, Fannie and Freddie executives have already been awarded $51 million ??? not a bad take. Who authorized that and why hasn't he expressed outrage at this group who are largely responsible for the economic mess we have right now. I resent that he takes me and my fellow citizens as brain-dead. We are watching what he is doing and we are getting increasingly fed up.

    I promise you that I will work tirelessly to see that he does'nt get a chance to spend two terms destroying my beautiful country.

    • Posted By: notime2 @ 05/17/2009 11:01:44 PM

      Apparently you don't know history; there is not one place in the U.S. Constitution was it states that this country was founded on Judeo-Christian ethics. This country was founded on religious freedom for all; most of your long ranting commentary is based on the right winged playbook.If the dead and living veterans were offended in the last 8 years they will never be offended.

      • Posted By: John Dough @ 05/26/2009 10:44:58 PM

        Wrong Christian Pilgrims came here seeking to escape persecution in Europe. and America was established as a Christian nation but the nation did not dictate a specific chrsitian religion such as Catholic or Lutheran as a natioonal religion. Congress opened in prayer then as it does today and in early America you had to profess fatih in Jesus Crist to take office after being elected and if you refused you were not seated in congress. Soundslike a Christian nation to me.

    • Posted By: TheFourthHorseman @ 05/17/2009 5:08:29 PM

      First of all, I want to say that it is good to see you post something on topic in a civilized manner; however I must dispute the following points:

      ???Does he not understand or know the history of the 20th century????

      The 20th century is over, and Europe has learned for their mistakes; one of many lessons learend is that diplomacy can go a long way, too bad Bush was too arrogant and old world to figure that out.

      ???This country was founded on Judeo-Christian ethics and the principles governing this country, Does he not understand this????

      This whole notion of the ???Christian Country??? was manufactured by the Eisenhauer administration in order to oppose the Atheist Communist adversary. Sure, there were Christian founders, accompanied by Deist founders, and founders of other faiths or belief systems, etc. If anything this country was founded on the principles of Enlightenment, it was Eisenhauer who stamped the wor ???God??? on everything, not Washington , nor Jefferson, nor Madison, etc.

      Personally, I do not believe any enlihtened nation should affilioate itself with any religion.


      ???Our President does not bow down to anyone, let alone the king of Saudi Arabia.???

      Was Bush not seen holding hands with the Saudi King? Respect for other cultures when we???re on their turf is not a bad thing, we are not the Romans, here???

      • Posted By: John Dough @ 05/26/2009 10:28:51 PM

        You are certainly a product of the current education system and revisionist history. Anyone who knows anything about American History knows this country was indeed founded on Christian principles, the three teir govt system Executive Legislative and Judicial are right out of the old testament. Study the Bible and real hsitory t will be enlightening or in you case disheartening to know the truth.

      • Posted By: TheFourthHorseman @ 05/17/2009 5:09:15 PM

        ???I am convinced that he and the members of his administration have the historical and intellectual depth of a mud puddle and should be ashamed of themselves.???

        Sir, you are entitled to your opinion; though I see nothing wrong with him redeeming us, after Bush ran our name and reputation into the ground waging a shameless war for profit, you wantt to talk about treating our allies with respect?

        ???He is so self-righteously offended by the big bankers and the American automobile manufacturers yet do nothing about the real thieves in this situation, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Frank, Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelic, the Fannie Mae bonuses, and the Freddie Mac bonuses.???

        It is my contention that anyone involved in defrauding the American people, whether it be the fatcat bankers, the wallstreet conmen, or the career politicians should be punised to the full extent of the law REGARDLESS of their party affiliations, wouldn???t you agree?

        ???What about the U.S. House members passing out $9.1 million in bonuses to their staff members ??? on top of the $2.5 million in automatic pay raises that lawmakers gave themselves????

        Sadly our lawmakers have been doing this for decades now, where were you for the last 40 years? I don???t condone this practice, but it is nothing new, therefore yoyu can???t tie the Obama administration to this without questioning the Bush, Reagan, Nixon, Ford, Clinton, (fill in the blank) administrations???

        ???I resent that he takes me and my fellow citizens as brain-dead. We are watching what he is doing and we are getting increasingly fed up.???

        Where was this outrage when Bush passed the draconian Patriot Act (draconian laws congress have been trying to pass sense 1996, though they were shot down due to the laws being deemed unconstitutional, yet when you add the word ???Patriot??? to the laws and you bring it to the table less than two months after a national tragedy???)? Where was your outrage when Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld launched a war for profit? Whewre was your outrage when Bush started this bail out business? (never forget, Bush started the bail outs) You want to talk about playing the people for fools?

        ???I promise you that I will work tirelessly to see that he does'nt get a chance to spend two terms destroying my beautiful country.???

        I hope you can find someone better than Palin, for your sake

        • Posted By: Lee Holmes @ 05/20/2009 4:00:19 PM


          PATRIOT is not ''draconian''. Indeed, not a single American was ever arrested under its aupices.[indeed, Obama has no plans to shelve it ]. The media lied to you and us regarding this device. No ''Cheney photographer'' was ever arrested under PATRIOT. No ''eight protesters at the Minneapolis RNC Convention''were ever arrested under PATRIOT''. No ''16 year old boy in North Carolina'' was ever arrested under PATRIOT,despited the wingnuts on both sides having it so. No American citizen ,was ever arrested under PATRIOT .

          www.volokh.com [Lawblog].

        • Posted By: thinkTwice @ 05/20/2009 2:00:51 PM

          Wow .FourthHorseman, I applaud you ... loved your post. Succinct and to the point

  • Posted By: concerned liberal @ 05/26/2009 2:43:17 PM

    If we've learned anything about the president it is that party politics trump democratic ideals, earmarks, lobby groups, concern for non-Americans, big business at the expense of the little guy, war is ok as long as it is me adding troops, unions get theirs first, way before the will of the majority!

  • Posted By: rey812 @ 05/24/2009 8:37:27 AM

    It's easy to be "cool" in a crisis when you can read answers to questions from a teleprompter. He has flip flopped on Gitmo, releasing abuse pictures, and tax cuts for the middle class, and follows Bush's disastrous economic bailout plan. What would Newsweek say about any other President who did that? What is special about Obama that causes news organizations to ignore absurd things he does? Is there an affirmative action program for half-black presidents that holds them to a lower standard?

    • Posted By: Bulldoglover100 @ 05/26/2009 9:13:10 AM

      Oh the old Teleprompter screed LOL Is this the best you have?

  • Posted By: mario.hernandez.solorio@live.com @ 05/26/2009 12:49:21 AM


    I think you are quite right when he says it is too early to assess the government of President Obama. Moreover, their views are very interesting, when fully crumbles all of the actions that President Obama has taken in just 100 days, and I think that is the crux of this matter. Nobody, no president in the last 50 years had developed a very wide and varied agenda of topics in just 100 days.
    Let's see this: None of the political opponents of then-presidential candidate Obama gave the slightest chance to succeed in such a short time avalanche and debris left by his predecessor in the White House: 2 wars, devastated economy, bad image in the world, Cuba, Iran, South America, Mexico in its two aspects, drug trafficking and immigration, and others you mention, who were walking on real minefields. 100 days then we can talk about it with some quiet, although we know that much remains to be resolved these problems, the difference is that now we know that if you solve the vast majority.
    The question is: Does anyone urged Bush when all seemed lost?
    He greets his friend Mario Hernandez Solorio
    mario.hernandez.solorio @ live.com

  • Posted By: xlntcat @ 05/24/2009 6:45:13 PM

    Obama has never been aloof. Caroline Kennedy is aloof. Obama is charismatic and the most self-disciplined individual, I have ever seen. I understand that self discipline is such an anomoly in D. C. that has been unrecognizable among the commentators, jounalist, and pundits. When you watched Obama standing before thousands the day his grandmother died with tears streaming down his cheeks but with a perfectly controlled voice, did you think that symbolized aloofness? Did you think those were the "fake" tears used in the movies, TV etc. Just a trick of the trade, so to speak. When you watch him with his wife and with his children, do you think how cold and aloof. Now when you observe the "animal in the zoo" during congressional hearings with the posturing, preening and cluelessness regarding the subject matter. Do you feel good about those prima donas? Do you confuse hysteria and "bad" acting with passion and enlightened fervor? I assume that at some time in the past the "high drama" may have been entertaining to some. Today, we are not amused.

    Just like everyone else including President Obama, I don't know what the outcome of his presidency will be, but Jimmy Carter was never a Barak Obama. I know that we assimilate incoming data by referencing it to past experience to accomodate it into our own cognitive experience, but is nether the most efficient or the most accurate way to draw conclusions. In this era of 'twitter,' sound bites and instant gratification, is Obama the only representive left of strategic thought? The only thing that I am relatively sure of other than the thoughtful intelligence of the President is that he or those with whom he surrounds himself are strategic planners who utilize tactics only as they accomodate their overall strategic blueprint. Will it continue to work for them in governing as it did in the campaign? Time, not commentary, will provide that answer.

  • Posted By: I'm not American @ 05/21/2009 1:37:16 AM

    Obama wants to be perfect only because all of us WANT AND NEED him to be perfect, its not all his fault.

  • Posted By: JPACTS @ 05/20/2009 10:30:52 PM

    OH, and for all Obama's control the cost yes indeed What about the U.S. House members passing out $9.1 million in bonuses to their staff members ??? on top of the $2.5 million in automatic pay raises that lawmakers gave themselves? I understand the average House aide got a 17% bonus. I surely didn???t! Executives at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will be receiving $210 million in bonuses over an eighteen-month period, that's $45 million more than the AIG bonuses. In fact, Fannie and Freddie executives have already been awarded $51 million ??? not a bad take. Who authorized that and why hasn't he expressed outrage at this group who are largely responsible for the economic mess we have right now.

  • Posted By: JPACTS @ 05/20/2009 10:26:11 PM

    Did you see what the arricle' s author said - scary - Obama he says is a one man band it appears- let's hope Obama took Perfect pills !

    "Obama sees himself as both ringmaster and star performer. He appointed a galaxy of policy czars, yet now seems determined to do their jobs as well as his own.

    The president's knack for deep dives into policy questions is impressive. But as quick a study as he is, his supreme confidence may shade into overconfidence. He shows signs of suffering from the arrogance that often accompanies brilliance. It's unlikely, for instance, that Obama can function as his own grand strategy guru. But he doesn't seem inclined to give the job to anyone else."

  • Posted By: John Dough @ 05/20/2009 6:14:50 PM

    OBAMA HAS PROVEN OVER AND OVER AGAIN TO BE A LIAR DURING THE CAMPAIGN. He said no one making under 250K would pay a dime more in taxes. He has since proposed a sugary beverage tax, a beer tax increase, Federal and state income taxes to apply toward employer provided health insurance (an avergae increase of $4000.00 per year. The Cap and Trade Tax on utilities and businesses will be passed on to consumers estmated to cost $160.00 a month or 2K a year.He is going to have to raise the medicare tax (medicare will be insolvent by 2017) to keep the program going, he is going to have to increase the social security tax estimated to be insoolvent by 2037. He is also going to have to have a massive income tax increase to reduce his monsterous deficits he has created at a rate 4 times that of GWB. His new automobile standards will result in a $1300.00 increase in the cost to purchase an auto by 2016 to meet his standards. He has also increased the cigarette tax and is poised to raise taxes on everything we buy with a federal sales tax. So at a time when Americans are suffering with job loss, home foreclosures, bankruptcies repossession of their cars and trucks and oil prices starting to spike he continues with his heavy handed tax and spending to get his socialized agenda in place before the 2010 elections. Return Congress to the GOP!!!! and stop this "change" while there still is some "hope".

  • Posted By: Lee Holmes @ 05/20/2009 3:45:07 PM

    Dunno. I was reading several vintage Weisberg articles he penned for SLATE from 2005-2008 and in every one of them, he recoils in horror from the same things he does not mention regarding Obama.[ creating, yet again,another NEWSWEAKian sychophant for Obama].

    Rendition: Hated it [but is still being used].

    ''State Secrets'' Hated these,[still being defended and hidden by this administration].

    Wiretapping. Hated it [still being used].

    The Surge. Scorned it, believed that it would not work [ Obama is sending 17,000 additonal US troops to Afghanistan as the portion of a ''Surge''].

    Military Tribunals .REALLY hated these,as did his pal Lithwick who is equally silent these days. [ Obama will begin using just this device later this month].

    Face it Jake. This aint Chinatown, and you are still a worthless hypocrite.

  • Posted By: notime2 @ 05/17/2009 10:49:33 PM

    Jacob Weisberg you do not have a clue what you are talking about; your assessment of the President is totally based on your low-self esteem and self-identifying issues. Jacob you are odd base on the President's relationship with the leaders and staff; you wish the President didn't care about his team. Jacob your article is a piece based on your biased opinion. I reject your article as misguided and based on your desire to be a member of the team.

    • Posted By: jh35180 @ 05/20/2009 3:41:27 PM

      I don't know that Weisberg's assessment of the President is based on his (Weisberg's) low self esteem. I think that it is definitely refreshing to see someone from Newsweek take a critical approach of Obama. Most of the press still gives Obama a free pass and you have to view any elected official with some cynicism. I really think that Obama would be better served if people didn't fawn all over him. If you never have any disagreement or dissent then you truly will end up with more problems then you started with.

    • Posted By: bjsassy @ 05/19/2009 8:26:14 PM

      notime - Finally, an article in Newsweek that does not fawn all over Obama! You must be shocked to see an article in the MSM that is mildly critical of Obama. That just does not happen to the Annointed One! The journalists never asked him any tough questions during the campaign. A private citizen by the name of Joe asked him about wealth distribution. He later became known as Joe the Plumber. We all know what happened to his privacy,

  • Posted By: jh35180 @ 05/18/2009 5:05:42 PM

    Obama is basically an on-the-job-training President. Just like George W. Bush, Obama is not qualified to be President. His followers cover for him repeatedly. He has made several gaffes himself: For example, the Special Olympics gaffe on the "Tonight Show" comes to mind. His politically correct minions act like this is no big deal. What if a Republican had said that? Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Janeane Garofolo, et al. would have made their usual stupid comments, but Obama gets his usual free pass. As far as any substantive things here is what Obama has done: 1. Managed to exacerbate an already monumental debt (that occurred under Bush) to a level of @ 13% of GDP. It hasn't been this bad since 1945. 2. Obama ran a grandiose campaign og "no earmarks." How many earmarks were there in the budget? 3, Obama said he wanted no lobbyists, how many former lobbyists are on the Obama staff?

    In short, Obama is a politcal hack from the Daley Machine. He is typical of Chicago style politics. Look at the Chicagoans that he brought in with him? Rahm Emannuel, David Axelrod. This country deserves better.

    • Posted By: thinkTwice @ 05/20/2009 1:56:11 PM

      We definitely have better than what we had ... Bush, Cheney, Rummy

      • Posted By: jh35180 @ 05/20/2009 3:28:05 PM

        You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I don't think that Obama is necessarily worse, but he has not proven to me that he is better. Just yesterday, the new credit card bill made it through and Obama will probably sign this into law later this week. I realize that this had bipartisan support and I also realize that the bill is aimed at scam artists and crooks in the credit card business. Obama was touting the merits of this bill while he was campaigning in New Mexico last week. What Obama and his pals aren't telling us that those of us who pay our bills on time will have to pay more in fees. In other words, those of us who pay on time are being penalized at the expense of those who don't pay their bills on time. That is the problem with this bill. And this is why I respectfully disagree with your premise.

  • Posted By: atsegga @ 05/20/2009 2:55:15 PM


    The Borgen Project has some good info on the cost of addressing global poverty.

    $30 billion: Annual shortfall to end world hunger.
    $550 billion: U.S. Defense budget

  • Posted By: thehappyamerican @ 05/18/2009 8:52:39 PM

    oBAMA IS LIKE GORE, AND WANTS TO SEE JOBS CLOSE OUTSIDE THE METRO AREAS TO INDUCE PEOPLE TO MIGRATE TO THE BIG CITIES...LIKE THE TOTALITARIANS DO.
    MORE EFFECIENT CONTROL IS THE GOAL! BECAUSE CONTROL IS THE GOAL. LIBERALISM AND PROGRESIVENESS IS NOT ABOUT INDIVIDUAL FREEEDOM, AT ALL.
    WHEN YOU LOSE YOUR JOB IN RURAL AREAS--SUCH AS A CAR DEALER-- IT IS HOPED YOU MOVE TO A GREAT OZ NEAREST YOU! LOOK AT A COUNTY RED/BLUE MAP ACROSSED THE NATION AND LOW AND BEHOLD! THE DEMS FOCUS CONSOLIDATION IN BIG METRO AREAS!
    THESE ARE THEIR BERLINS AND MOSCOWS! COME ONE.COME ALL! WE GIVE YOU A BROOM AND YOU SING THE PRAISES OF GREAT SOCIALIST STATE!
    SOME OF US ARE 'NT GETTING TO KNOW OBAMA! WE KNOW ALREADY! aND TRYED TO WARN EVERYONE.
    WE WILL CONTINUE TO.

    • Posted By: thinkTwice @ 05/20/2009 1:54:36 PM

      he,he .... don't forget your medication tonight

  • Posted By: dicere @ 05/19/2009 4:57:22 PM

    t seems in politics fallacies of logic are common. Today Senator Pelosi reach deep into the fallacy bag of tricks and used Proof by verbosity, sometimes colloquially referred to as argumentum verbosium - a rhetorical technique that tries to persuade by overwhelming those considering an argument with such a volume of material that the argument sounds plausible, superficially appears to be well-researched, and it is so laborious to untangle and check supporting facts that the argument might be allowed to slide by unchallenged. Chris Matthews favorite when it comes to the President is Style over substance fallacy: occurs when one emphasizes the way in which the argument is presented, while marginalizing (or outright ignoring) the content of the argument. Several other commonly use fallacies of logic are appeal to the masses (everyone else is doing it) and appeal to higher authority (The Pope does it so it must be good.)

    When it comes to President Obama appeal to higher authority is not an option; unless it might be to God. Saying other world leaders are doing something might be a case of appeal to higher authority or appeal to the masses. President Obama's use of logic is depends on the subject. When it comes to energy, food, climate he uses Naturalistic fallacy: a fallacy that claims that if something is natural, then it is "good" or "right". Several others use by the President and the administration are:

    * Appeal to motive: where a premise is dismissed, by calling into question the motives of its proposer
    * Appeal to novelty: where a proposal is claimed to be superior or better solely because it is new or modern
    * Appeal to poverty (argumentum ad lazarum): thinking a conclusion is correct because the speaker is financially poor or incorrect because the speaker is financially wealthy
    * Appeal to wealth (argumentum ad crumenam): concluding that a statement is correct because the speaker is rich or that a statement is incorrect because the speaker is poor

    When there is no logic for an action one can only resort to defense. The common defense mechanism for both the President and the administration is projection. Claiming the problems currently haunting the country were inherited, each member of the current administration in fact helped create the problems facing society today. President Obama was a senator and very aware of the problems of today, he voted or did not vote on many issues, he was one of the 50 most senior representatives of the entire population of the United States as are the list of characters (in one way or another)who surround the President today. Can you really claim George did it all? Your administration have attributed to President Bush all of the problems accumulated over the last several years without admitting any complicity.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse