In the spring of 2000, not long after Barack Obama was trounced in the Democratic primary for a South Side Chicago congressional seat, Daniel Fischel staged an intervention. Meeting with Obama in the main lounge at the University of Chicago Law School, where Fischel was then dean and Obama was a part-time senior lecturer, Fischel offered Obama some unsolicited advice. "I told him that it was obvious his political career was going nowhere," Fischel recalls, "and that he really ought to think about doing something else."
The particular "something else" Fischel had in mind was a full-time tenured professorship; to sweeten the offer, Fischel said the law school would even hire Obama's wife, Michelle, to run its legal clinic. Although the move would require Obama to give up his state Senate seat, Fischel tried to convince his junior colleague that Chicago professor might be a more natural role than Chicago politician for a cerebral guy like him. "I mentioned people who'd been faculty members like [Antonin] Scalia and [Richard] Posner and [Frank] Easterbrook and many others who had gone on to very distinguished careers outside of academia or in combination with academia," Fischel says. "I told him he could be a faculty member as well as a public intellectual."
Obama declined Fischel's overture, saying that he wanted to give elected politics another shot. And today, of course, it's hard to find any fault with the wisdom of that decision. Still, the episode is interesting not only as a counterfactual (how much does Hillary Clinton wish Obama had spent last December grading Con Law exams instead of stumping in Iowa?) but as a window onto Obama's relationship with those who don't share his ideology. The University of Chicago Law School, after all, is a famously conservative institution--the birthplace of the law-and-economics movement and the incubator of numerous conservative intellectuals; Fischel himself literally wrote (with Easterbrook) one of the fundamental books on law and economics, in addition to another book arguing that the government's prosecution of Michael Milken was unjust. Yet, eight years ago, there was something about Obama that made Fischel and other Chicago conservative legal scholars want Obama to be their colleague--and today, at least for some of them, maybe even their president.
Obama first came to the University of Chicago Law School's attention via one of its more celebrated conservative faculty members, Michael McConnell, who's now a federal judge on the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals and reportedly was on George W. Bush's short list of potential Supreme Court nominees. Back in 1990, when McConnell was still teaching at Chicago, he wrote an article about church- state relations for the Harvard Law Review that Obama, who was then the Law Review's president, edited. As McConnell recently recalled the experience to Politico: "A frequent problem with student editors is that they try to turn an article into something they want it to be. It was striking that Obama didn't do that. He tried to make it better from my point of view." McConnell was so impressed with Obama that he recommended him to the head of Chicago's appointments committee at the time, Douglas Baird, a bankruptcy expert and a law-and-economics devotee. "Michael's a very smart guy who's basically a very good judge of horse flesh--he wouldn't typically recommend people," says Baird.
Baird approached Obama about a teaching job at Chicago during his third and final year as a student at Harvard. "You look at his background--Harvard Law Review president, magna cum laude, and he's African American," Baird says. "This is a no-brainer hiring decision at the entry level of any law school in the country." But Obama wasn't interested. Obama did, however, mention that he was writing a book on voting rights, so Baird arranged for him to become a Law and Government Fellow at the school--a position that provided Obama with an office and a modest stipend he could use in the course of his writing. When Obama came to Baird in the middle of his fellowship to report that his book on voting rights had morphed into the memoir that would become Dreams From My Father, Baird told him not to worry. "It was a good deal for us," Baird explains, "because he was a good teaching prospect and we wanted him around." Indeed, after the publication of Dreams, Baird, who was then dean of the law school, took another shot at hiring Obama as a professor. Obama, who was in the midst of successfully running for the state Senate, once again declined. But he did accept the law school's offer to become a senior lecturer--then a title held only by Posner and Easterbrook--and teach a reduced course load of three classes per year.
For the next eight years, Obama taught upper-level constitutional law courses on equal protection and voting rights. He was a huge hit with his students. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, which reviewed students' evaluations of Obama's courses, he was almost always rated one of their favorite instructors during his time at Chicago. Given the subject matter of Obama's courses, one might assume that students in the classes--which were electives--would have been disproportionately liberal. But Chicago's reputation for producing law professors tended to mitigate against that. "Anybody who's thinking they want to go into academia, conservative or liberal, kind of knows they have to take equal protection," says Kenworthey Bilz, who took equal protection from Obama in 1997 and is now a professor at Northwestern Law School. "I can very confidently say he didn't strike me as liberal or conservative."
Because of his political duties in Springfield, Obama scheduled most of his classes on Monday mornings and Friday afternoons--before or after the weekends he'd spend with his family in Chicago--which meant he rarely participated in the law school's famous faculty seminars and workshops. This caused a little grumbling among some of his colleagues. "He was at the law school but not of the law school, like Posner and Easterbrook," says Richard Epstein, the famously libertarian law professor. "He's not someone who came to lunch when the topic wasn't one of his choosing." But other faculty said Obama made contributions outside the classroom in other ways. Obama was particularly good at "bonding with students and being a forceful mentor with students," says Baird. "The hours he kept tended to be different. Frank Easterbrook doesn't get up before ten o'clock, where Barack would be there at eight o'clock. Students could have a cup of coffee with him at eight o'clock, and many did."
Obama's closest colleagues at the law school tended to be the more liberal members of the faculty--such as Cass Sunstein and Geoffrey Stone--but many conservatives were fond of him, even though they often didn't see eye to eye. Saul Levmore, the school's current dean, whose politics are hard to characterize but generally right-leaning, says, "We were intensely interested in him. We were looking for him to say, 'I'm giving up politics, I want to be an academic.' We were always in recruiting mode with him." Epstein, who once almost sold his Hyde Park home to Obama and would buttonhole him to talk about things like state mandates for health insurance, offers one reason why: "He was always a terrific listener. He'd sit there and cock his head, take it all in."
Of course, as Epstein points out, Obama's willingness to listen didn't necessarily mean he was willing to be convinced. "What you don't get, alas and alack, out of all this is a change in point of view," Epstein says. "If you ask me whether I had any influence on his intellectual or moral development, I'd say no, not even a little."
But other Chicago conservatives seem content with the fact that Obama tried to understand their point of view, even if he didn't wind up adopting it. "What I know from my dealings with him at the law school is that he does really attempt to understand the points of view of other people who look at the world or a particular issue differently than he does," says Fischel. "He's much more intellectual, much more thoughtful, much more interested in discussion, debate, and dialogue than the typical politician. And that gives me some confidence about him, even though from my perspective he's much too liberal. I've never voted for a Democrat in my entire life. He's the first one I might vote for."
Jason Zengerle is a senior editor at The New Republic.
Subscribe to The New Republic for only $29.97 a year--75% off cover price!
Intellectual rigor. Honest reporting. Influential analysis. Don't miss another issue of the magazine considered "required reading" by the world's top decision-makers. Subscribe today.
COMMENTS (36)
“But he did accept the law school's offer to become a senior lecturer--then a title held only by Posner and Easterbrook--and teach a reduced course load of three classes per year.”
Wow. And this on the basis of what "achievements"?! Editing the Law Review at Harvard and writing Dreams of My Father?! Hey, don't let anyone tell you this guy was given a leg up...
“But he did accept the law school's offer to become a senior lecturer--then a title held only by Posner and Easterbrook--and teach a reduced course load of three classes per year.”
Wow. And this on the basis of what "achievements"?! Editing the Law Review at Harvard and writing Dreams of My Father?! Hey, don't let anyone tell you this guy was given a leg up...
"Hey, don't let anyone tell you this guy was given a leg up..."
Maybe one of the best recruiting law colleges in the world saw something in his ability to absorb, reconstruct, and represent an issue? Maybe they saw a man who was not only an intellectual but a good teacher?
"Hey, don't let anyone tell you this guy was given a leg up..."
Maybe one of the best recruiting law colleges in the world saw something in his ability to absorb, reconstruct, and represent an issue? Maybe they saw a man who was not only an intellectual but a good teacher?
R U Serious? President of the Harvard Law Review and a published memoir by the early-30s is not enough for you? What - he didn't also cure world hunger by the time he was forty?
Without winning the upcoming presidential election, this guy has credentials that match up with a select few across our society; others have certainly achieved more at a younger age and coming from a more disadvantaged background - but its a small list.
Give the man his props.
R U Serious? President of the Harvard Law Review and a published memoir by the early-30s is not enough for you? What - he didn't also cure world hunger by the time he was forty?
Without winning the upcoming presidential election, this guy has credentials that match up with a select few across our society; others have certainly achieved more at a younger age and coming from a more disadvantaged background - but its a small list.
Give the man his props.
R U Serious? President of the Harvard Law Review and a published memoir by the early-30s is not enough for you? What - he didn't also cure world hunger by the time he was forty?
Without winning the upcoming presidential election, this guy has credentials that match up with a select few across our society; others have certainly achieved more at a younger age and coming from a more disadvantaged background - but its a small list.
Give the man his props.
R U Serious? President of the Harvard Law Review and a published memoir by the early-30s is not enough for you? What - he didn't also cure world hunger by the time he was forty?
Without winning the upcoming presidential election, this guy has credentials that match up with a select few across our society; others have certainly achieved more at a younger age and coming from a more disadvantaged background - but its a small list.
Give the man his props.
I am progressive, but one thing that has been made clear by the fantasies that drive the Bush administration is that something that transcends traditional liberal/conservative political leanings for me is a dedication to rationality and openness to fact. I have been driven up the wall by the current trend to base information on compelling narrative rather than objective fact; the reason I support Obama whole-heartedly is because he has consistently been interested in the world how it actually is, rather than how he would rather it was.
I think this is the crux of his bi-partisan appeal.
I am progressive, but one thing that has been made clear by the fantasies that drive the Bush administration is that something that transcends traditional liberal/conservative political leanings for me is a dedication to rationality and openness to fact. I have been driven up the wall by the current trend to base information on compelling narrative rather than objective fact; the reason I support Obama whole-heartedly is because he has consistently been interested in the world how it actually is, rather than how he would rather it was.
I think this is the crux of his bi-partisan appeal.
John Roberts was also President of the Harvard Law Review, clearly a more potent legal mind, and indisputably more accomplished than Barack Obama at his present age - why shouldn't he be President?
John Roberts was also President of the Harvard Law Review, clearly a more potent legal mind, and indisputably more accomplished than Barack Obama at his present age - why shouldn't he be President?
It will be interesting how right-wing legal thinkers end up dealing with a President Obama's judicial nominees knowing that he will likely choose people who are both liberal, yet also open-minded enough to listen to other points of view. They will also probably find it harder to smear their friends.
It will be interesting how right-wing legal thinkers end up dealing with a President Obama's judicial nominees knowing that he will likely choose people who are both liberal, yet also open-minded enough to listen to other points of view. They will also probably find it harder to smear their friends.
The only thing law review means at any school is that you got high grades in your classes. There is no peer review for law journals unlike every other subject. But that he got on law review and made president is impressive.
The only thing law review means at any school is that you got high grades in your classes. There is no peer review for law journals unlike every other subject. But that he got on law review and made president is impressive.
When was the last time someone who had not written ANY scholarship -not a single law review article!- was offered tenure at the University of Chicago Law School?
This is a serious question. I wonder if the reporting is incomplete.
When was the last time someone who had not written ANY scholarship -not a single law review article!- was offered tenure at the University of Chicago Law School?
This is a serious question. I wonder if the reporting is incomplete.
If Obama were interested in how the world is, he wouldn't have proposed free health care for everyone. Use a little of the rationality liberals like to pride themselves on: if the "single-payer" Medicare costs are growing at an unsustainable rate -- and Medicare just covers Americans 65 and older -- how can we afford the equivalent of expanding Medicare to everyone under 65?
Obama's making promises the federal budget can't keep, and he knows it. You just like the narrative.
If Obama were interested in how the world is, he wouldn't have proposed free health care for everyone. Use a little of the rationality liberals like to pride themselves on: if the "single-payer" Medicare costs are growing at an unsustainable rate -- and Medicare just covers Americans 65 and older -- how can we afford the equivalent of expanding Medicare to everyone under 65?
Obama's making promises the federal budget can't keep, and he knows it. You just like the narrative.
The main thing this piece does for me is give me a big mallet with which to whack professorgate back into its hole should it ever again rear its ugly head. Okay, so Obama was a "senior lecturer" and not a "law professor"--but only because he himself declined a professorship.
The main thing this piece does for me is give me a big mallet with which to whack professorgate back into its hole should it ever again rear its ugly head. Okay, so Obama was a "senior lecturer" and not a "law professor"--but only because he himself declined a professorship.
There was a dust-up a few months back concerning Obama's claim to having been a "Professor of law" at the University of Chicago. This article seems to advance the "Oh no he din't" side of the argument; the position of Sun-Times columnist Lynn Sweet (among others).
There was a dust-up a few months back concerning Obama's claim to having been a "Professor of law" at the University of Chicago. This article seems to advance the "Oh no he din't" side of the argument; the position of Sun-Times columnist Lynn Sweet (among others).
Let me ask a question? Who was the first black in the History of Harvard to be the Editor of the Harvard Law Review? Hmm do you think that he was given this as an affirmative action position or do you think he might just be one of the brightest young lawyers in the country. Oh by the way he it appears to many people that he also has a great personality and charm. Maybe he should have decided to take one of those corporate Law positions and eventually found himself appointed to the Supreme Court or he could have taken one of the teaching positions offered in this article. Well no, he decided he wanted to serve his country as a statesman and maybe help somebody along the way. Give the guy cred ... view full comment
Let me ask a question? Who was the first black in the History of Harvard to be the Editor of the Harvard Law Review? Hmm do you think that he was given this as an affirmative action position or do you think he might just be one of the brightest young lawyers in the country. Oh by the way he it appears to many people that he also has a great personality and charm. Maybe he should have decided to take one of those corporate Law positions and eventually found himself appointed to the Supreme Court or he could have taken one of the teaching positions offered in this article. Well no, he decided he wanted to serve his country as a statesman and maybe help somebody along the way. Give the guy credit no matter what color he is he's got the same thing that JFK, Nelson Mandela, Winston Churchill, Ronald Reagan had; a gift. People like this young man are here to fulfill a destiny and purpose it's far beyond what most people can perceive.
Please this is really getting out of hand he has become like a drug to people, this is very dangerous. NO he does not have the gift Nelson Mandela or Winston Churchhill had. They were real heros who had a depth Obama will never reach due to his arrogance and ego. Their depth came from struggle and was not recognized fully until later. He is going to trip himself up with his mouth because when he is interviewed or debates he comes off as very not together and rather sophmoric. Three classes a year do not a profess. make. He does the shine quite well but there is really no substance with this guy. How can you be president of H. Law Review and never publish. Well you get others to do all the w ... view full comment
Please this is really getting out of hand he has become like a drug to people, this is very dangerous. NO he does not have the gift Nelson Mandela or Winston Churchhill had. They were real heros who had a depth Obama will never reach due to his arrogance and ego. Their depth came from struggle and was not recognized fully until later. He is going to trip himself up with his mouth because when he is interviewed or debates he comes off as very not together and rather sophmoric. Three classes a year do not a profess. make. He does the shine quite well but there is really no substance with this guy. How can you be president of H. Law Review and never publish. Well you get others to do all the work and you take the glory and give them atta boys and girls. Why would you write a book early on... well you have some negatives in your past you want to out yourself on. Many of us are not Obama's fools. The press loves him but their love affair may soon be over due the tight control and manipulation of his handlers. He is a paper dragon who if elected will be in way over his head. I am sure the foreign heads are sizing him up right now and can see his weakness while they glad hand him. Obama has out gamed himself it will be interesting to watch.
This cannot be correct, how could Obama have been offered a tenured position at the law school with only a teaching record and no scholarship beyond his days at the Law review. I think you mean "tenure-track"?
This cannot be correct, how could Obama have been offered a tenured position at the law school with only a teaching record and no scholarship beyond his days at the Law review. I think you mean "tenure-track"?
People seem to think that Judges Posner or Easterbrook don't deserve to use "Professor" because they are only "senior lecturers." At most American schools that I am aware of, almost all faculty members are called "professor" whether full time or adjunct and regardless of the particular title of the position. A senior lecturer at Chicago would probably be called an adjunct professor as well. On the other hand, British shools are a little different. Their full time faculty are divided into lecturers and readers, with Professor being reserved for the most senior and prominent faculty members. In Britain, a senior lecturer would probably not be called "professor," although the position would be ... view full comment
People seem to think that Judges Posner or Easterbrook don't deserve to use "Professor" because they are only "senior lecturers." At most American schools that I am aware of, almost all faculty members are called "professor" whether full time or adjunct and regardless of the particular title of the position. A senior lecturer at Chicago would probably be called an adjunct professor as well. On the other hand, British shools are a little different. Their full time faculty are divided into lecturers and readers, with Professor being reserved for the most senior and prominent faculty members. In Britain, a senior lecturer would probably not be called "professor," although the position would be equivalent to a tenured professor in the US.
Would the use of "professor of law" by Obama be correct? Definitely. The only clarification that might be necessary would be to qualify it as an adjunct position.
Heehee. We are so used to having a moron as President many can't picture having a President with a brain.
I can find a better President than Bush on any golf course this weekend.
:-)
Heehee. We are so used to having a moron as President many can't picture having a President with a brain.
I can find a better President than Bush on any golf course this weekend.
:-)
President of the Harvard Law Review is an elected position. Obama was also chosen to address his class at graduation instead of some more famous big wig. Clearly a group of very bright and talented people thought very highly of its classmate. Coupled with the respect and admiration he received from the dean and faculty of the pre-eminent conservative-leaning law school in America, I think it's pretty clear that this guy gets through to people of all ideological stripes and earns their respect.
"John Roberts was also President of the Harvard Law Review, clearly a more potent legal mind, and indisputably more accomplished than Barack Obama at his present age - why shouldn't he be President?"
... view full comment
President of the Harvard Law Review is an elected position. Obama was also chosen to address his class at graduation instead of some more famous big wig. Clearly a group of very bright and talented people thought very highly of its classmate. Coupled with the respect and admiration he received from the dean and faculty of the pre-eminent conservative-leaning law school in America, I think it's pretty clear that this guy gets through to people of all ideological stripes and earns their respect.
"John Roberts was also President of the Harvard Law Review, clearly a more potent legal mind, and indisputably more accomplished than Barack Obama at his present age - why shouldn't he be President?"
I don't know how you assess the capabilities of two people of similar academic qualifications who chose starkly different career paths after law school. Roberts went on to be a Supreme Court litigator in Washington and gained attention for his work in that area. Obama went on to be a community organizer and law school lecturer, and ultimately entered the political world. To say that one of these is clearly superior to the other is like comparing apples and oranges, to say nothing of the fact that Roberts is not running for president.
Bill Mc asked: "Who was the first black in the History of Harvard to be the Editor of the Harvard Law Review? Hmm do you think that he was given this as an affirmative action position ..."
No doubt, Obama is brilliant. However, until the 1970s the editor of the Harvard Law Review was chosen on the basis of academic achievement - the student with the highest academic rank got the job. The election system was later changed to help give minority students a better chance to get the editor's job.
Obama took over the Editor's post from (I think) the first Chinese-American to hold that position. The first woman to get the job was Susan Estrich, about a dozen years before Obama.
Bill Mc asked: "Who was the first black in the History of Harvard to be the Editor of the Harvard Law Review? Hmm do you think that he was given this as an affirmative action position ..."
No doubt, Obama is brilliant. However, until the 1970s the editor of the Harvard Law Review was chosen on the basis of academic achievement - the student with the highest academic rank got the job. The election system was later changed to help give minority students a better chance to get the editor's job.
Obama took over the Editor's post from (I think) the first Chinese-American to hold that position. The first woman to get the job was Susan Estrich, about a dozen years before Obama.
So, we have a politician that is a lawyer, while not training to be a lawyer, when not training others to be a lawyer, for all of his adult life and who wants to be president. And I'm supposed to be impressed? This is the well rounded individual, the best and brightest, to follow in the footsteps of boy Clinton, the lawyer? When did the ABA become the vanguard party of the United States?
So, we have a politician that is a lawyer, while not training to be a lawyer, when not training others to be a lawyer, for all of his adult life and who wants to be president. And I'm supposed to be impressed? This is the well rounded individual, the best and brightest, to follow in the footsteps of boy Clinton, the lawyer? When did the ABA become the vanguard party of the United States?
jericho4119
Where are the props for Condi? Provost of Stanford, National Security Adviser, Secretary of State. Speaks Russian, German, French, Spanish. Or do only democrats deserve props?
jericho4119
Where are the props for Condi? Provost of Stanford, National Security Adviser, Secretary of State. Speaks Russian, German, French, Spanish. Or do only democrats deserve props?
I had the good fortune of working with Barack while he was at the Law School. He was a sensation. Students adored him (as did I). He is brilliant and charismatic. What you see on TV in 2008 is what we saw at the UofC for years. I am a libertarian who votes republican but he took time over the years to try to persuade me to his way of thinking. I was skeptical - but the more we talked, the more I believed in him. I supported him when he was running for state senate and now that he is poised to be our next president, I am proud to say that I am voting for a democratic presidential candidate for the first time in 28 years of voting in presidential elections. Moreover, I am contributing ... view full comment
I had the good fortune of working with Barack while he was at the Law School. He was a sensation. Students adored him (as did I). He is brilliant and charismatic. What you see on TV in 2008 is what we saw at the UofC for years. I am a libertarian who votes republican but he took time over the years to try to persuade me to his way of thinking. I was skeptical - but the more we talked, the more I believed in him. I supported him when he was running for state senate and now that he is poised to be our next president, I am proud to say that I am voting for a democratic presidential candidate for the first time in 28 years of voting in presidential elections. Moreover, I am contributing to his campaign, and volunteering for him. This man is the real deal and we need him in the White House.
Dear So What,
John Roberts is very accomplished, you're right. In response to your question, though, Robers should not be elected President because he has not yet declared himself a candidate for the Presidency.
Dear So What,
John Roberts is very accomplished, you're right. In response to your question, though, Robers should not be elected President because he has not yet declared himself a candidate for the Presidency.
"People like this young man are here to fulfill a destiny and purpose it's far beyond what most people can perceive."
Like Alcibiades?
"People like this young man are here to fulfill a destiny and purpose it's far beyond what most people can perceive."
Like Alcibiades?
John Roberts was not President of the HLR, he was Managing Editor. David Leebron, currently the President of Rice University was the President that year.
John Roberts was not President of the HLR, he was Managing Editor. David Leebron, currently the President of Rice University was the President that year.
So What--Sorry, I missed the presidential candidacy of John Roberts. When did he run?
So What--Sorry, I missed the presidential candidacy of John Roberts. When did he run?
As an academic, I agree that to be vigorously pursued by U Chicago for pretty much anything is an impressive feather in the cap. It says quite a bit. ******* Two things strike me about this article: one, while they wanted to hire him, I wouldn't interpret the story to include a broad "Obama won over" the faculty to his politics. A single "I might vote for him" is pretty weak. Two, he may listen, but he doesn't seem to be influenced by good arguments from intelligent people. So, is he more driven by fundamental "beliefs" that are protected from his intellectual curiosity? That would be disturbing to me.
As an academic, I agree that to be vigorously pursued by U Chicago for pretty much anything is an impressive feather in the cap. It says quite a bit. ******* Two things strike me about this article: one, while they wanted to hire him, I wouldn't interpret the story to include a broad "Obama won over" the faculty to his politics. A single "I might vote for him" is pretty weak. Two, he may listen, but he doesn't seem to be influenced by good arguments from intelligent people. So, is he more driven by fundamental "beliefs" that are protected from his intellectual curiosity? That would be disturbing to me.
Hmm, in all this odd quibbling about his title (this is why Republicans will lose this election btw, because of stupid stuff like this), it seems to escaped several readers that the point of the article is that Obama was tagged as an early up-and-comer by those who are decidedly not his "base." His crossover appeal is what makes his story unique and makes him a bit of an engima to both sides of the left/right divide. His personal ability to offer respect and disagreement in equal measure makes him different from most, and the ability of those who views are diametrically opposed to his, to see such promise in him, is also unusual. I suspect this is the intangible that has brought him such ... view full comment
Hmm, in all this odd quibbling about his title (this is why Republicans will lose this election btw, because of stupid stuff like this), it seems to escaped several readers that the point of the article is that Obama was tagged as an early up-and-comer by those who are decidedly not his "base." His crossover appeal is what makes his story unique and makes him a bit of an engima to both sides of the left/right divide. His personal ability to offer respect and disagreement in equal measure makes him different from most, and the ability of those who views are diametrically opposed to his, to see such promise in him, is also unusual. I suspect this is the intangible that has brought him such quick and early recognition and is the cause of his surprising appeal, and may be that ingredient that catapults him to the Presidency over the familiar, sometimes provocative, but ultimately pedestrian Senator McCain.
John G have you read about Winston Churchill's life, "initially did poorly in school", "had a speech impediment", "lost his father at an early age... didn't have a good relationship with either parent.." I say this because you're looking through hind sight glasses... No one would have predicted Churchill's greatness including you... Mandela was considered a terrorist and only by the grace of GOD is he still alive and considered a great statesman... So why do you say with ignorance and/or arrogance that Barrack Obama is no Churchill or Mandela... If he has a gift, which I believe he does, then he should be and will be in the same group with Kennedy, Reagan, Churchill, and Mandela. Note that I ... view full comment
John G have you read about Winston Churchill's life, "initially did poorly in school", "had a speech impediment", "lost his father at an early age... didn't have a good relationship with either parent.." I say this because you're looking through hind sight glasses... No one would have predicted Churchill's greatness including you... Mandela was considered a terrorist and only by the grace of GOD is he still alive and considered a great statesman... So why do you say with ignorance and/or arrogance that Barrack Obama is no Churchill or Mandela... If he has a gift, which I believe he does, then he should be and will be in the same group with Kennedy, Reagan, Churchill, and Mandela. Note that I didn't include MLK, Jr. .. who also had the gift, because he was a minister/activist not a politician or head of State... John G, I can understand if you don't believe in gifts and destiny... However, is it possible that because of your unbelief you won't recognize YOUR gift and YOUR destiny.. I hope for you and the fate of those that you are destined to help that you will come to the conclusion that WE ALL have gifts and a purpose for being here... Be blessed.. Find your gift and use it... that's what Barrack Obama is doing....
"And this on the basis of what "achievements"?! Editing the Law Review at Harvard and writing Dreams of My Father?!"
And, you know, being an Illinois State Senator.
"And this on the basis of what "achievements"?! Editing the Law Review at Harvard and writing Dreams of My Father?!"
And, you know, being an Illinois State Senator.
I like the following paragraph:
Epstein, who once almost sold his Hyde Park home to Obama and would buttonhole him to talk about things like state mandates for health insurance, offers one reason why: "He was always a terrific listener. He'd sit there and cock his head, take it all in."
Of course, as Epstein points out, Obama's willingness to listen didn't necessarily mean he was willing to be convinced. "What you don't get, alas and alack, out of all this is a change in point of view," Epstein says. "If you ask me whether I had any influence on his intellectual or moral development, I'd say no, not even a little."
So, he listens to people's points of view but has already made up his mind. He w ... view full comment
I like the following paragraph:
Epstein, who once almost sold his Hyde Park home to Obama and would buttonhole him to talk about things like state mandates for health insurance, offers one reason why: "He was always a terrific listener. He'd sit there and cock his head, take it all in."
Of course, as Epstein points out, Obama's willingness to listen didn't necessarily mean he was willing to be convinced. "What you don't get, alas and alack, out of all this is a change in point of view," Epstein says. "If you ask me whether I had any influence on his intellectual or moral development, I'd say no, not even a little."
So, he listens to people's points of view but has already made up his mind. He will just pretend to hear you by cocking his head but one can have no effect, -- I am not sure why the speaker presents that as a positive thing.
Kennedy was a cokehead and used amphetamine, Churchill was a man sculpted by circumstances; Mandela well.. Reagan my idol was smart enough to use and collaborate with different people and get things done. Obama is just another democratic oversized brain with zero experience from the business world and forreign politics. Mccain is the guy to go to, but god do I miss Reagan.
Kennedy was a cokehead and used amphetamine, Churchill was a man sculpted by circumstances; Mandela well.. Reagan my idol was smart enough to use and collaborate with different people and get things done. Obama is just another democratic oversized brain with zero experience from the business world and forreign politics. Mccain is the guy to go to, but god do I miss Reagan.
This article makes much out of nothing. So he is a likable fellow. Is it really surprising that people who know and have worked with Obama have nice feelings about him? Or is the assumption that anyone with a right of center viewpoint must automatically despise a liberal? Perhaps Zengerle is projecting his own biases. Liberals think conservatives are evil. Conservatives thing liberals are wrong. Not bad. Just wrong.
This article makes much out of nothing. So he is a likable fellow. Is it really surprising that people who know and have worked with Obama have nice feelings about him? Or is the assumption that anyone with a right of center viewpoint must automatically despise a liberal? Perhaps Zengerle is projecting his own biases. Liberals think conservatives are evil. Conservatives thing liberals are wrong. Not bad. Just wrong.
Juan in post 10 you really need to know a candidates policy to sound good criticizing it. Dennis Kucinich was the only candidate endorsing "single-payer" universal health care. Obama's isn't offering any free health care, he has policies to lower health care cost (including a reinsurance pool for catastrophic cases for employers), small businesses will be able to pool together to get better prices and be able to offer insurance, allow adult children being covered up to age 26 on parents policies, not allow companies to discriminate because of a pre-existing condition. Common sense things.
People can keep the insurance they have and it should end up costing less. People who opt for the federal ... view full comment
Juan in post 10 you really need to know a candidates policy to sound good criticizing it. Dennis Kucinich was the only candidate endorsing "single-payer" universal health care. Obama's isn't offering any free health care, he has policies to lower health care cost (including a reinsurance pool for catastrophic cases for employers), small businesses will be able to pool together to get better prices and be able to offer insurance, allow adult children being covered up to age 26 on parents policies, not allow companies to discriminate because of a pre-existing condition. Common sense things.
People can keep the insurance they have and it should end up costing less. People who opt for the federal plan will BUY into it. The lower income uninsured will get subsidies to help them afford to buy insurance. Almost 50 million uninsured people is shameful and most are working lower income people.
That's an overview so go read the plan and then say bad things about what the policy really says.
John Galt in 14 you would probably "write a book early on" about yourself if a publishing house approached you after you were president of Law Review and offered you a contract to do it. As far as getting "others to do all the work" go read some articles about that time and his 80 hour weeks. You do realize that the main thing Law Review publishes is articles from others, not by the students themselves? By your standard they would all be lazy.
People who don't like Obama oddly label his supporters as fools or worshipers or drugged. Is researching his positions and policies, listening to his town halls a drug? It is not a sin to give a good speech as well as being intelligent, knowledgeable and thoughtful. The fool meme goes poorly with the fact that from the start the more educated the voter the higher his support.
Obama is not as smooth in debates or interviews as speeches of course but your interpretation is off. He does not excel at sound bites, he thinks as he talks and gives the answer and that is more halting at times and nuance is harder to express simply.
He has weaknesses but not that.
It takes an ego to enter politics but your issue with his arrogance and ego is your opinion. Sophomoric? I'd describe your post as such.
For those who belittle Obama,he defeated the Clintons
Bill was regarded as American best politician,if that
proves nothing to Obama detractors,then,they are as
delusional as their guys at the wh.
I do not expect much of him,for me he is another
Clarence Thomas,besides,its the corporations the ones
in charge,no matter who sits at the oval.
For those who belittle Obama,he defeated the Clintons
Bill was regarded as American best politician,if that
proves nothing to Obama detractors,then,they are as
delusional as their guys at the wh.
I do not expect much of him,for me he is another
Clarence Thomas,besides,its the corporations the ones
in charge,no matter who sits at the oval.
Just because you use the word "clearly", doesn't make it clear to me. It may be true, but why do you think Roberts has a better legal mind than Obama.
Just because you use the word "clearly", doesn't make it clear to me. It may be true, but why do you think Roberts has a better legal mind than Obama.