NYT's Front Page Obama Profile: "The Ultimate Pragmatist"

New York Times:

In August 1999, Barack Obama strolled amid the floats and bands making their way down Martin Luther King Drive on Chicago's South Side. Billed as the largest African-American parade in the country, the summer rite was a draw over the years to boxing heroes like Muhammad Ali and jazz greats like Duke Ellington. It was also a must-stop for the city's top politicians.

Back then, Mr. Obama, a state senator who was contemplating a run for Congress, was so little-known in the community's black neighborhoods that it was hard to find more than a few dozen people to walk with him, recalled Al Kindle, one of his advisers at the time. Mr. Obama was trounced a year later in the Congressional race -- branded as an aloof outsider more at home in the halls of Harvard than in the rough wards of Chicago politics.

But by 2006, Mr. Obama had remade his political fortunes. He was a freshman United States senator on the cusp of deciding to take on the formidable Hillary Rodham Clinton and embark on a long-shot White House run. When the parade wound its way through the South Side that summer, Mr. Obama was its grand marshal.

The secret of his transformation, which has brought him to the brink of claiming the Democratic presidential nomination, can be described as the politics of maximum unity.

Read the whole story: New York Times

Comments

[NicoleAnonymous]

I thought the article was kind of negative - instead of "pragmatic" it made him just seem as if he will say or do anything to get elected.

[ctbutte]

Well duh!

[NicoleAnonymous]

But when I reading the article I thought it was highlighting his accomplishments and showing how he can work with two sides and bring people together but then towards the end it started to get negative and after I was done I thought "that article was actually negative" but I wasn't suprirsed.

Yesterday MO said Clinton had an "ice pick" so everyone would think she was like the Sharon Stone character in that movie.

[rollingdivision]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-kass_bd11may11,0,4134722.column

"I know there are those like John Kass who would like me to decry Chicago politics more frequently, and I'll leave that to his editorial commentary," Obama said.

Not the politics, just the corruption, I said then, wishing silently that he had decried it all, that he'd stood up years ago and pointed to the list of sleazy deals, pointed an angry finger at the Duffs, the white, Outfit-connected drinking buddies of Daley who received $100 million in affirmative action contracts through City Hall.

That's an easy political commercial for the Republicans: Mobbed-up white guys party at the old Como Inn with Daley, and they get $100 million in city affirmative action contracts and Daley doesn't know how it happened and Obama endorses the mayor in the name of reform.

Obama had nothing to do with the Duff deal. But he kept mum. He has endorsed Daley, endorsed Daley's hapless stooge Todd Stroger for president of the Cook County Board. These are not the acts of a reformer, but of a guy who, as we say in Chicago, won't make no waves and won't back no losers."

[rollingdivision]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-kass_bd11may11,0,4134722.column for the truth.

[ApolloniaCreed]

So now Obama is to blame for political corruption in Chicago? *laughs*

[tipiglen6]

I don't know whether it was intended to be negative as some have thought. I found it a fairly 'balanced' article, and , as some have noted, it re-affirmed my own support for the man. I can't remember having been so entranced by the process of an American election in fifty years, and there have been a few in that span. The last time I was moved to vote, I cast my vote for a Chicago man, one Dick Gregory. I still have one of his 'dollars'.
;-)
ed

[whizkid]

Pure old school Chicago politics.
He's a sham and a ruse.

[ohiodem250]

To be honest with you, it all makes sense now to think of this through the paradigm of business. That's why they call the effort to take people's vote away disenfranchisement. Your vote is a franchise - it's like owning stock just for being born here (hence some people's opposition to immigration). That is the true genius of limiting campaign contributions: it makes everyones' holdings a bit more equal in number. [It also makes you wonder if McCain might not be too sad if Obama won (ever wonder why his party hasn't fully supported him? IMMIGRATION and CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM - JOINT NON-MODERATED DEBATES? COULD WE REALLY BE IN FOR A REVOLUTIONARY CAMPAIGN SEASON?).]

[ohiodem250]

There are some very big hurdles for Sen. Obama along the way. What is incredibly exciting about Obama is not only the scope and pace of his political rise but the way in which it expresses itself. Much has been made of his fund-raising abilities, specifically, the number of zeros, and, to a lesser extent the number of donors. If one could consider the political campaign through the paradigm of a multi-national corporation, and I don't know why that thought would not have struck itself on anyone who has been paying attention to politics for the past 50-60 years, Sen. Obama had one of the greatest IPOs and it was called the Democratic primary. Basically he and Hillary are in a proxy fight. And so is John McCain (but that comes later). It turns out that the true populist, for as much as John Edwards wanted to be (and I believe it was somewhat sincere), is Obama; on the strength of all his small donors, many who have never participated in politics before (some in a very long time).

[ohiodem250]

Maybe I'm a liberal (and I'm guessing a good many of the rest of the posters are), because this profile of him affirmed every reason why I would support him in a run for the Presidency. I love that the NYTimes was trying to put a negative spin on it. It makes me happy when a paper slightly right of center does not approve some of our politicians. What some of the more skeptical observers of Sen. Obama's campaign fail to see is that everything about Sen. Obama's whole life represents compromise and making things work. From his race to his life circumstances to his political affiliations. Some people find it strange that he would ally himself to such a diverse, and seemingly, contradictory groups of people. They wonder what his intentions are. Is he merely a soulless opportunist only out for political gain? But in a political system built on a Machiavellian value system, one based on associations and friendships built through ruthless scrutiny and calculation, Sen. Obama seems to have subverted the system. He has turned the game inside out. Because he's young and gifted (and I don't doubt his very race has helped him sit at so many diverse tables - both blacks and whites can see his face in the mirror), he has made friends with everyone and proved his Rolodex bigger than anyone's.

[Madampotential]

I know the writers of the article meant to slam him but this really makes me like him. Anyone that can work with all of those diferent groups in a big multi-ethnic city like Chicago or NY or Boston is pretty talented. He is going to be great with Congress. I think this guy is going to get some things done... you can't make everyone happy but at least he listens.

[missette]

Aside what everyone else has said, this article welll illustrates that Obama doesn't merely react to situations as they happen but is always looking forward, seeking alliances, finding concensus. His demeanor during this campaign shows just this disposition as well. He didn't match Hillary's brute tactics with brute tactics not just because he's a decent person, but because such sniping would get in the way of the bigger picture - building a broad alliance to win the White House and change the way this country works. Even his major difference with Hillary - his opposition to the war - was based on a view to the long term, not simple, immediate political expediency. Where Hillary reacted, Obama acted. In other words, he behaved like a leader while she was simply being a follower. Even now, while Hillary divides the electorate along racial llines, Obama's moved far past her, leading a nationwide registration drive with eyes on November.

[Sabreen60]

Very astute.

[bitterspinster]

I completely agree with your analysis.

[drkazmd65]

Yep,... right on the button. We need a leader that can actually think more than one election cycle ahead.

Now - we just need to decide to follow his lead.

[MizFlagPin]

Who would expect to see such a huge divide between Obama's supporters and Clinton's supporters. The Democratic Party represents the People's Interest. And aren't most of our interest the same?

Do not we all seek to provide for our needs and the needs of our family. Most of us enjoy the comraderie of relatives and friends. We all experience joy and sadness. We are equal members of the human race.

As Democrats we recoiled at the tactics of Republicans in GE's of yester years. We were dismayed at the hollowing out of our beloved country. We've been diced, sliced and cut every which way but loose.

We watched our jobs leave, our pay stagnate, our expenses rise, our loved one's killed or maimed in an illegal war. We've seen gas prices double and utility bills rival our mortgage note.

So how is it, that we Obama's and Clinton's supporters find ourselves separated by a widening divide?

Barack Obama is the presumptive nominee, the Democratic candidate for the Presidential Office. An imperfect man? Yes, an imperfect man that's just right for an imperfect nation.

I'm a ferocious supporter of Obama as my profile reflects. But on this blog I must ask that let us retire the things unsuitable for the civilized. Let us ignore the pushers and addicts of hate for they worship the god of conquer and divide.

Yes I can may be ridiculed by the conservatives. No I Can't is unacceptable to the progressive.

May God Bless the USA

[liberalghost]

"....We watched our jobs leave, our pay stagnate, our expenses rise, our loved one's killed or maimed in an illegal war. We've seen gas prices double and utility bills rival our mortgage note.

So how is it, that we Obama's and Clinton's supporters find ourselves separated by a widening divide?..."

Cuz each side believes believes they are purer than the other,

But for you specifically....you really think dog (oops, dyslexia in action) reads HuffPost? Screw the "Dog bless..." nonsense. (Praise Satan! Ptaise Zeus! Priaise Buddha! Praise the Fying Spaghetti Monster!)

[paganmist]

I love this description of him, and even though it's slightly negative, I think it's the PERFECT way for a politician to go.

The ultimate politician - President, even - needs to be able to compromise when necessary, and take ALL of his or her constituents into account... and in a country like the US, those people are often very different, with opinions that are precisely the OPPOSITE of each other's.

Instead of playing favorites or taking sides - which a lot of politicians do - a good Presidential candidate will campaign for EVERYONE, will include EVERYONE, will figure out at expense of his or her own health and fortune how to do the right thing not just for the "majority", but for EVERYONE.

It's a hard job, and it takes some deft maneuvering - political and otherwise - to do it.

So right. Not all politicians are bad, and not all are good.

It's the GOOD politicians we need working for us - the ones who can get the job done, who can become chameleons when they need to, but who at the same time NEVER sacrifice a core sense of ethics.

That is what Obama brings to the table. His ethics this campaign have been brilliant. He defended Rev. Wright at the expense of his campaign because his ethics said that he could not forgo a friend in need, he stood up to the gas tax pander, and he's refrained from the kind of slanderous, race-baiting tactics that

[MikeMidCity]

Barack Obama is a political phenomena who is a once in a life time chance for America.

He has exploited his background to his fullest benefit in a pathway to the Oval Office that is as short as Lincoln's was.

He could be just as course changing for America as Lincoln.

[themethod]

hear hear

[drkazmd65]

Let's hope so MikeMidCity - we could use a modern-day Lincoln.

[colette]

OK, so if his rhetoric is lofty he's too much of an idealist. If he makes the usual alliances politicians make on the way up, he's "the ultimate pragmatist" (read: a sell-out).

How does anyone run for the presidency with perfect scruples? and without a powerful grip on realpolitik? Isn't it better to have someone who can make common cause with a lot of factions? Didn't the Clintons turn away from some of their own progressive allies (read: Lani Guinier) as they tried to govern from the center? Weren't FDR, JFK and LBJ master tacticians?

Yes, there are lines that should never be crossed and scruples that should never be tossed overboard. But this is a big, diverse, polarized country. And as we've seen, politics can get extremely ugly, even for principled people.

That said, it's fine for the New York Times and other media to probe into Obama's background, ask questions about it., and be thorough in their own "vetting" of a major candidate. They should do that vigorously, with him and McCain. I just hope that the so-called "liberal" press (read: mainstream) doesn't do the job they did on Gore and Kerry, while letting Bush off the hook. In fact, I think if they gave this level of scrutiny to any highly successful politician in America, they'd get a similar story.....

[kempis]

It's thrilling and heartwarming to see someone affiliated with the Chicago Machine win the nomination. When is the last time that happened? It's sort of like seeing the Cubs go to the World Series.

And my goodness, what will Obama do if he actually wins? He's been running for the next rung the moment he's won an election since he entered politics way back in 1995. He's very good at campaigning. Anyone have any idea how he'll be at governing?

[CapitalistRebel]

Judging by the way he's run his campaign (which is an organization), he will be great. Could you say the same thing about Hillary?

[Dustee]

or McCain?

[WFV]

It is thrilling to have a Machine candidate. The Cubs will win this year, maybe even the Bears too! Anything is possible!

I think he will govern well. He has a knack for surrounding himself with high quality people and I do believe thoroughly that he will be someone who can bring everybody to the table, hash out differences, and make actual progress. I think we are finally in for something great in the country.