“Nearly everybody puzzles over Obama’s ad hoc responses to Egypt, Libya and now Syria, grasping for a still-elusive Obama Doctrine.”
Not me. Obama’s pretty much been what I’ve expected based on the two main things I see in him:
#1 He’s incapable of “thinking on his feet” or understanding that there are problems in the world that don’t play by orderly rules or (esp. in the case of foreign affairs) are even particularly rational. Obama lives in a world where you have to measure thrice before writing a paper on cutting once. He’s very good at that. But anything else “rushes” him. And IMHO, that further extends to a thought process that naively believes any issue, including those related to foreign affairs, can be reduced or controlled into a neat, lawyerly proceeding with the “right” policies. The reality is far messier, and always has been, even with the smartest diplomacy.
#2 I firmly believe Obama is just far too soft for the job of President. Ever since George Stephanapolous (sp?) had Obama reeling in the May 2008 Democratic primary debate, I’ve seen him as someone who just isn’t very tough. Since then, he has (among other things) let Pelosi and Reid walk all over him, reminded us “he won” on several occasions, dragged his feet on dealing with Afghanistan for so long that Dianne Feinstein jumped his case in public, and most recently snarled at a Texan reporter for not giving him “enough time” to answer tough questions. A leader has to be able to take a punch, and give as good as he (or she) gets. I just don’t think Obama can do that.
All MHO, of course.
Good comments but the professors (anticipating such arguments) counter with:
1. He’s disadvantaged because “The complex thinker can suffer from ‘analysis paralysis’ and confusion; he can be prerceived as unprincipled or disloyal to the values that elevated him to power; and he can be seen as too willing to make trade-offs.”
2. And: “As Obama’s capacity for complex thought can become a liability, so, too, can his cool rationality. Politics often rewards the emotional over the rational. Nuclear deterrence, for example, works only if your enemy thinks you are crazy enough to destroy the world….But because Obama is unfailingly rational, opponents aren’t afraid of him doing something crazy”