I've only diaried on dKos once before, but I feel strongly enough about the recent spate of "failure" vs. "stand-by-your-man" diaries that I'd like to weigh in to the discussion with what I feel is the neglected, neutral position.
Without calling anyone out, I'd like to define my terms. The "failure" diaries are the ones that say, "We expected Obama to be The One and he isn't and if he can't live up to that responsibility, we won't support him."
On the other hand, the calls to "stand-by-your-man" go something like this: "You voted for him, and you knew what you were getting, and he's great, and even if you don't think so, suck it up."
To be clear, I feel that both these positions are internally consistent and have great merit...in some aspects. I also am wholly excluded from both.
I mostly feel excluded because both positions include the proposition that I signed up for something -- either that I signed up for radical, progressive change (which is not being delivered), or that I signed up to be a soldier in the Obama administration's political army (which I did not).
I did sign up for radical, progressive change, but that does not mean I need to view the president as a failure. I never expected that President Obama would be the one to deliver the change I hope to see in my lifetime. I did not support him during the primaries and I remain proud of the decision I made at the time. I was open about my policy disagreements with him and about my concerns over what I felt could be inexperience or deceptive language (all of which I do not remotely mean in the sense that the teabaggers do). I cried joyful tears the night he won the election; I cried the same tears on inauguration day. But I never deluded myself into thinking that I would be unwilling to fight tooth and nail against his administration should it turn down the wrong path.
By the same token, I cannot be exhorted to stand by him, to give him a fair shake or the benefit of the doubt for his entire first term. He absolutely is fulfilling many of the promises he made as a candidate, but those were promises I did not support at the time (again, different primary candidate). Therefore, the argument that we got what we paid for is unconvincing to me. Just because I clearly understood the unmitigated disaster that would be a McCain/Palin administration does not mean I ever made my peace with electing a man who feels that bipartisanship is a show of strength or that the morals of the majority should have a revered place in public life.
The president has not captured my heart, and I rather doubt that he ever will. If he has captured yours, that's fine; by all means, enjoy it. But think about what you're asking of me if you'd like me to join you. You're asking me to default on my personal version of feminism and my personal version of atheism. You're asking me not look my gay friends in the eye. You're asking me to change what I believe, at least a little, in order to support the political fortunes of a party that I was never too crazy about to begin with.
Neither am I deserting him or the progressive movement. It's not either/or. Don't ask me to pick a side.