Weakness and leadership

[kiryan]

Is Obama a strong or weak leader? I suppose it all depends on how you define strength. I'd like to make the case that he is a weak leader.

My definition of a strong leader is someone who is out in front and makes the decision. Someone who takes a position (or principle) and defends it until proven wrong... and has the strength of courage to accept it when they are wrong.

I don't think you can characterize Obama as out in front or as leading. He was heavily criticized for not being actively engaged in healthcare, the oil spill and currently on the budget, Japan and middle east. He is criticized by his base for failing to push cardcheck (for unions), DOMA (for gay marriage) and fair pay (for women).

On controversial subjects, he doesn't take positions... he tries to address them in a way that doesn't address it or address it through his cabinet who act as a firewall (Holder on DOMA for example). The racial flap early during his candidacy was a good example... there was a racism issue, he addressed it by not addressing it... Loughner/Gifford shooting is another example where he didn't address the tough issues, but instead issued a hope and change message with no substance.

This situation is clearly a teflon approach, nothing sticks to me because I never did or said anything that can be attributed to me. This approach is consistent with his legislative record (he voted PRESENT instead of YES/NO extremely often especially on controversial issues). Can you really call someone a leader who won't take a position in public?

There are some examples of Obama being a strong leader, but I'll leave that up to the liberals ton contribute... so make your case.

Finally, I end with this. Is a strong leader, one who defers to others to make the decision? I say no. GWB was a strong leader, he took advice then made a decision. I note Obama often claims to be consulting his advisors, but I also note no decision is forth coming.

Look at the response on Libya cited below... Obama won't take any action without the UN security council authorization AND broad Arab support... Is that a leader? Someone who won't make a decision until everyone else confirms the same decision? I call that weakness, you're afraid of criticism.

Even his own party recognizes that. Weiner's words below sums up my position. You aren't a leader if you just wait for the other side to mess up.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/03/17 ... tronghold/

The Obama administration said it would not act without Security Council authorization, did not want to put U.S. ground troops into Libya, and insists on broad international participation, especially by Arab states, the diplomat said.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51454.html

“The sum and substance of our strategy can’t be waiting for the other side to [mess] up,” Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) told bloggers Wednesday.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/03 ... z1GsIEwox2

[kiryan]

Obama's indecision on Libya is pissing Clinton off. Basically she's trying to support democracy over there and Obama won't do anything so if her interview comments are to be believed, she's done no later than 2012. She wouldn't even take VP. Course the article ends with another possibility, she wants to be a grandmother.

http://www.thedaily.com/page/2011/03/17 ... llary-2-2/

Fed up with a president “who can’t make his mind up” as Libyan rebels are on the brink of defeat, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is looking to the exits.
...
“Obviously, she’s not happy with dealing with a president who can’t decide if today is Tuesday or Wednesday, who can’t make his mind up,” a Clinton insider told The Daily. “She’s exhausted, tired.”

[amena wolfsnarl]

Or maybe he feels that too many American soldiers have died in foreign matters. Is it really the right time for the American army to invade another country and support a fledgling government? Does it really matter to America If Libya is free of ghadafi? I know what he is doing is a horrible thing, but is it really americas place tk do this. In reality the UN should start stepping up it's game and managing matters like this, oh wait I forgot the way the UN is set up to be incredibly useless.

I agree he shoild have kept his mouth shut, but perhaps he's makin the tougher choice and keeping American sons and daughters alive, when they are already in a war in 2 fronts. I know you just want to make him look bad, but don't you think that perhaps he is making the better choice for america?

[kiryan]

Lets assume that explains Libya... What about everything else? Obama is not a leader in the sense that past presidents have been a leader... and you can make the case that its good, but you can also make the case that its bad.

Who would you say is the stronger leader? The guy who dices and says so sorry, or the guy who says I'm handing this out. I can make the argument that the guy who dices, cedes his decision making authority and leadership to a pair of dice to avoid blame (and leading)... just like Obama has said we won't do anything without the UN's agreement. Is that leadership? maybe... but certainly not like past US presidents.

Its the same with executive groups at companies and probably boards too... they all get in a room discuss an issue, pretty much tell each other what their position is.. come to an agreement and all vote unamiously... why? because executive committee decisions protect the individual members from pretty much any claim of wrong doing. You can say it was a committee decision to outsource this department or fire this employee. No discrimination or personal issues, it was a unaminous board decision to enrich ourselves by running the company into the ground.

This is really the difference between academics and leaders. Academics sit around and need a consensus before taking action... a leader (or entrepreneur) takes action. Obama is clearly an academic and academics are notoriously bad at taking criticism... which is why they need an echo chamber of their friends agreeing with their decisions and positions.

I reiterate, I'm not in favor of going to war in Libya at this point. that could change, but basically I like the idea of being non interventionist and giving the world what they've said they harped on for so long, the responsibility for world affairs.