Good.

To bring us back full circle, generally speaking, Obama will not be judged on performance alone but race probably will not have a main effect on that. It will be a combination of the aforementioned dynamics and additional factors.

That's how I feel. What it all boils down to is just plain haterade.

Are you talking specifically about the article posted above, or about any criticism of Obama or the Democrats?

A couple of things with this:

1) The concept of "moving on" would be brand new to this administration...I remember a lot of people not "moving on" during the last admininstration, and letting their views be known from the first day of Bush's presidency to the present day. For some people, "moving forward" means making their voices heard about things they disagree with in the new President's platform.

2) The President is indeed a Constitutional scholar, and no one is saying he's going to "ignore" the Constitution. What some people are saying, though, is that he'll find ways to expand or stretch certain parts of it.

Look, President Clinton was a Yale Law grad and a pretty brilliant guy himself...and he used those legal instincts to try to advocate for increased executive power in a bunch of instances. He wasn't ignoring the Constitution, but he was trying to find ways to stretch certain parts of it.

My early sense (based on the hires for his new administration from Clinton's Justice Department) is that President Obama will be attempting something similar. One can say it's to un-do many of the decisions made in the Bush presidency, but it will be interesting to see how it expands. I haven't liked some of the expansions of executive power over the past two administrations (Clinton and Bush), so I'd be wary of any other such increases in this administration.

But, this is all hypotheticals anyway, and I'll be watching to see how the next few months and years proceed.

ETA: I find some of the changes in attitude on the board really interesting. Some of the people who were quick to criticize Bush from day one are advocating for full, unquestioned support for President Obama. Some of the people who were asking to give Bush more leeway are jumping all over the new President. It's not that any of this is a great shock, as it happens every time there is a change in the Presidency, especially when it goes from one party to another party. It's just interesting to see how people's visions of the Presidency change when the people filling the role change.

It's really just a simplistic and hypocritical approach of "I'm happy so 'nuff said."

"I'm happy so 'nuff said" was never enough before this election and it isn't enough after this election.


But the complainers are happy now. End of discussion. Stop being a hater. :)

The funniest thing is that we were discussing social dynamics beyond Obama's performance. If people think Obama's swearing in was powerful enough to errode the relevance of social dynamics then I fear this society is even more clueless than I thought it was.

I notice that, too. Another reason why people need to stop being FANS of presidents and of political parties.

I know I'm kind of crashing here, but I've read this whole thread, and I just want to thank you so much for saying this! Why is it bad to have an intelligent discussion that reaches beyond the idea of "Obama was elected. Democrats won. End of story."?

Now I think I'll go get myself a big ol' glass of haterade!