Here is the book that I'll be talking about. Short version: very good; it gives insight into Barack Obama's contributions to the economic recovery while still on the campaign trail, his transitional period and to his style of governing.
It is NOT cheerleading; his faults and weaknesses are honestly discussed. But his strengths are also discussed; I can recommend this book to anyone who is intellectually curious and interested in politics/current events. I especially recommend it for his liberal critics.
More below the fold:
I've been interested in reading about the President. So far, the best two books not written by Barack Obama are these: David Mendell's book Obama: From Promise to Power which covers his political life up to his announcing his candidacy in February, 2007 and Renegade by
Richard Wolffe. The latter covers the campaign.
Both books are unflinchingly honest; they cover the positives, the negatives, the highs and the lows. I talked about these here.
Now I just finished reading Johnathan Alter's book The Promise: President Obama, Year One. This covers from the end of the campaign up to the time when Scott Brown won an upset victory in the Massachusetts special election to replace Senator Kennedy; the outcome of the health care reform push was covered in an Epilogue.
I can recommend this book for the intellectually curious political junkie of all stripes and for those who enjoy reading about how successful leaders operate. I especially recommend this book for his liberal critics; you might disagree with some of his policies but you'll get better insight as to how he came about pushing for these policies. I can recommend this book to intellectual conservatives too.
Those who want cheer-leading won't like it as this book frankly discusses his mistakes and weaknesses. Those who think that "Obama is an atheist-communist-fascist-Muslim who really isn't a citizen" ought not waste their time; besides these types will be hard pressed to handle the book's diction and vocabulary.
The book does contain a small "fluff" chapter on the President's personal life. But mostly, it covers the nuts and bolts on how the President runs the country. It touches on the good (The President's capacity to absorb details of complicated policy; his intolerance of toadies and "yes men", his ruthlessly seeking out the best people for the job) and the bad (sometimes overconfidence in himself; over promising, unrealistic expectations, inexperience in some areas, underestimation of the Republican opposition) and the contrasts.
Probably my favorite chapter was The Un-Bubba where he was contrasted with President Clinton. The latter tended to think less deductively and to make political considerations first; President Obama is the more deductive thinker and tends to think "what is the best possible policy" first..then adjusting to whatever he can get through Congress.
The book talks about the economy and how President Obama's team rescued this country's economy from catastrophe but still missed an opportunity for real reform and possibly a chance to make the recovery more robust (witness the current bad jobs report).
Ironically, the book starts when the 2008 campaign was nearing the end, but the economy was in serious trouble. President Bush (to his credit) took the first steps to stop the slide and he made it a point to include then Senator Obama and Senator McCain in the deliberations. It turned out that Obama was far better informed than McCain was; even the Republicans privately admitted that.
The book discusses some aspects of the presidency that received few headlines; an example would be the sections on his educational policy. Here, Obama sides with the reformers and is a strong advocate for "teacher accountability". Note: I think that he is a bit off base here; our problems in education go beyond having some poor teachers. Sure, Obama uses the bully pulpit to encourage parents to "turn off the tv" but I still think many of our educational problems are cultural (e. g.: our society's proud, loud anti-intellectualism).
I'll provide some quotes from the text that I found especially insightful:
Pages 10-11 (while TARP was being discussed)
Obama sensed that while Democrats were united, Republicans were in disarray. So he boldy turned to McCain and said "What do you think, John?" [...] But McCain wasn't ready to talk. He believed in seniority and would go last. [...] He seemed in a foul mood, offended by Obama's showy display of his command of the complex issues. "I'll just listen," McCain said, which didn't go over with anyone in the room. He was supposed to lead, not listen. [...]
Paulson had already indiscreetly told a few people in the room that he thought Obama had stronger grasp of the crisis than McCain did, and here he was fact to face with the Republican nominee. [...]
By this time the molecules of power in American politics were in a rapid state of realignment. McCain's absence form the discussion was stark. Bush, who was supposed to be leading the meeting, was poorly informed and detached. "He's already in Crawford", whispered one Republican. That left the skinny African American guy who has crashed into their world only three and a half years earlier . He was the only one of the big dogs who seemed to know what he was talking about. Obama was taking charge of the meeting--and the crisis--peppering the others with detailed questions.
Then on page 12:
Bush's expressive face said it all. When Obama spoke, he paid careful attention, as if he knew that he was there with his successor. When McCain spoke, Bush's face was quizzical and unconvinced, as if he'd eaten something sour. Dick Cheney offered his closed-mouth crooked half-smile, a sign of his skepticism. Obama chuckled softly.
Now to the chapter The Un-Bubba, where Obama's meeting style was talked about (page 222):
As a meeting wound down, the president would succinctly summarize each side's most logical arguments. "It's not just a recitation of what they said," Rouse explained. "It's actually taking apart what they said, making sure everyone understands it, and thinking through certain aspects of it." For both outside advisors and close aides, the president's ability to extract meaning from a wide-ranging discussion was one of his most impressive qualities. "In an incredibly organized fashion he'll do an lmost a, b, c, d recitation of an argument or a set of policies and it's almost like you've been given a road map to go finish your job,", Heather Higginbottom said.
Yes, the word Socratic is sometimes used with Obama.
Finally, I'll close from a passage from Modus Obama, which gives a bit of insight as to why I like his personality and possibly why others don't:
Obama had little tolerance for toadies. "His basic view is, 'Don't tell me I'm wonderful, tell me what is going on out there,'" said Claire McCaskill. All that insincere flattery was part of the Washington he disdained, though he was shrewd enough to know that it was also part of the job description. He felt the same about the waves of criticism in the second half of the yar. It was important to listen to it but not let it throw you off course.
One of the big surprises for Obama at the beginning was how much he had to deal with the petty egos of Congress. As the health care debate heated up after Labor Day, he spent dozens of hours in meetings with members. But because he lacked the elemental neediness of most politicians, he could never fully relate to their desire to be stroked. For the president, schmoozing members was like raising money or working a rope line. He didn't loathe all the gripping and grinning and the chit-chat; often he'd pick something up, the way Lincoln did in the 1860's when he took his "public opinion baths". But he didn't savor it either, as many politicians did. All things being equal, he would rather be upstairs reading a tome on nonproliferation or watching ESPN. And so he had to work at the part of being president that required being an actor. When he attended an event that didn't particularly interest him, he wasn't playing himself. He was playing "Barack Obama" in a costume he had carefully pasted together with the glue of self interest, and he was playing himself well.
The question was how long he could keep it up. He had convinced himself that charming members of Congress with room-temperature IQs was an important part of the presidency; his success depended on it. Or did it?
Update: The subject of torture was raised in the comments so:
Alter does talk about Obama's reversal on releasing some of the torture photos (page 232):
Many of the gruesome photos wee autopsy shots not necessarily related to detainee absue, but this distinction would be erased once they (the photos) were released. When he finally focused on it, Obama didn't see it as a close call. He was fully committed to ending torture, but he didn't think that the public would learn anything new" from the photos. So why inflame the Arab Street?