Obama: "If I Get Punched, Very Rarely Have You Seen Me Not Hit Back Hard"

Late last Thursday afternoon, before announcing who will join him in the fall campaign against John McCain, Barack Obama spoke with NEWSWEEK's Jon Meacham about fathers and sons, character and ambition--and how he will not hesitate to fight hard in the remaining weeks of the race. Edited excerpts:

MEACHAM: You and Senator McCain fit into very interesting categories of presidential history. There is either a really strong father in the picture--Adams, Kennedy, Bush--or there is virtually none at all--Jackson, Hayes, Clinton. Why do you think men with strong mothers and absent fathers tend to do so well in politics?
OBAMA: It's an interesting question, and I've always got to be careful about pop psychology. [But] I offered one suggestion in something I wrote in "The Audacity of Hope," and this is not original to me: "A man's either trying to live up to his father's expectations or make up for his father's mistakes." I think to put yourself through what is a pretty rigorous process of running for president, you've got to have learned to set up some pretty high expectations for yourself--something's got to be driving you--and in my case if you have somebody that is absent, maybe you feel like you've got something to prove when you're young, and that pattern sets itself up over time. But also because, again in my case, the stories I heard about my father painted him as larger than life, which also meant that I felt I had something to live up to. You could argue that if you're too well adjusted, you don't end up running for president. So if the pattern sets in pretty early on where you're pushing your comfort level, it probably has to do with those very early influences, and that can come from either the absence or the presence of a father who ends up motivating you in some way.

Read the whole story here.

Comments

[eden4barack08]

-"But I'll tell you what, if I get punched, very rarely have you seen me not hit back hard."-

Obama, I love you man, but I'm sorry, I disagree on this. I haven't seen any such thing.

[lovethesinner]

Love that picture of Barack. He looks like 007.

[MorpheusXNYC]

I agree. The problem is that Barack is fighting back on McCain's terms, letting him define the nature of the fight and pick the place where it's fought.

Additionally, I think the problem is that Barack believes in a proportional response and so he responds to one punch with another one, rather than a dizzying flurry or knee-buckling combo that sends the other guy sprawling onto the canvas.

Obama is going to have to go back to the well of Chicago politics and "get gully" as they say. The future of the NATION is at stake and Republicans have shown that they know how to win.
They keep bloodying Democrats with sleazy tactics, chipping away at our candidate's lead, all the the while admonishing us against going negative in order to keep us on the defensive and prevent us from fighting fire with fire.

And time after time, we somehow thing we're going to stay above the fray and fight the good fight and win.
I'll give the Clintons this much - they know how to play dirty, hardball, sleazy politics and win.

Barack COULD go hard against McCain and put him away. Sure he'll lose 3-5 points in the polls, but McCain will lose a good 10 points, at least, ensuring victory.

Sometimes you have to foul the other team in order to hold onto your lead and win the game.
Especially when the other team has been throwing elbows, shoving and intentionally fouling you the whole time.

[Rescisco]

"Fighting back" is the problem. You've let McCain define the contest, and now you will respond? Attact, attack, attack, define the enemy before he defines you. Oh, that battle's already lost and now (with the aid of the MSM) they have made the election about Obama etc. That is not good folks. I feel sick! For all of our idealism, we need to admit the "old (negative) politics" works. You have to beat these guys senseless at their own game. Its not to late, but we do by god need to get in the game!

[GaiusLucilius]

Recisco, you are right. That is it in a nutshell. You get a "favorite" click!

[erykah]

YOu know what,Americans are so stupid. I can say that because I am one. But really, this is why we are in the mess we are in becasue he major in tough talk and violent reaction. People do not want to engage in real isses, they just want to see politicians get down and dirty. This is nonsense. Folks grow up. This cowboy mentality is sickening.

[ms.understood]

This is a very good point. These are the same idiots that voted for Bush twice, so really, how much do we really expect from them. I'm an American too and I totally agree that they are just as stupid as the day is long.

[MorpheusXNYC]

Exactly. That's why it doesn't make sense to continue to use the old dignified, above board campaign strategy that all of our losing candidates have used.

Americans respond to campaign ads that impact them in a visceral way. Their brains are completely bypassed by a simple appeal to their bigotry, greed, fear, xenophobia and moral hypocrisy, and they'll pull the lever for the other guy every time.

Obama needs to make the campaign a referendum on Bush and McCain and the future of the country.

He needs fire and brimstone, apocalyptic ads showing the peace and prosperity we had under a Democratic government 8 years ago, the show how the country has degenerated and been turned into a global outhouse by the Republicans and Bush, then show what the future of the country will be like 4 years from now with the economically inept, elitist, war mongering McCain as president.

Voters will turn stark white, crap their pants and pull the lever for Obama in staggering numbers.

This needs to happen. Seriously....

[saron123]

I believe in you, Barack!

[FatherWolf]

"But I'll tell you what, if I get punched, very rarely have you seen me not hit back hard."

OK Senator, now's the time.

But keep it simple. Don't use complicated syntax that loses peoples' attention.

[pupbayer]

It's not the complicated syntax that loses peoples' attention...it's the verbosity. And when I think of O AND Biden...well, let's just say we need to schedule longer events if both are going to speak...and speak...and speak...and speak...

[theMightyT]

16 minutes each at the rally yesterday.

ya, that's WAY too long.

If you have the attention span of a 5 year old.

[McChimp]

FAIL.

[lindaqqq]

Way too long for people who can barely handle 30 sec. sound bites of information.
We've already had a dumbed down president who appealed to the weakest links of our society.
How'd that work out.

[confuseddemocrat]

I agree. Even though in liberal and artistic circles verbosity and complicated syntax is a sign of intelligence and deep thought, it has a tendency to turn alot of people off.

In addition, his stammerings and pauses coupled with his longwinded diatribes comes across as if he is trying to obfuscate his true intentions.

This is why he is being tarnished by the "elitism" and "empty suit" smears so easily.
Short but accurate concise messages are needed from Obama.

[Actionmac]

yeah keep it stupid... as sad as it sounds it's the truth and the reason we are not leading the world as we once did.

Next generation is going to have to pick up the ball and run with it or we will have a aristocracy not a democracy.

[NotWithObamaCampaign]

How about punching back on taxes? You know how my taxes increased under Bush?

o Increased state income taxes and sales taxes. Government cuts trickle down.

o Deregulation of credit card industry -- my 19% went to 31% (under 1970s usury laws even the 19% would be too high)

o Deregulation of oil -- under $2 to over $4 during the Bush administration. Why don't we, like Mexico, nationalize this as a strategic, nondelegable national interest? You should at least put it on the table to see what the stick does to speculation.

o Deregulation of drug industry. Undisclosed side effects of Lipitor made me unable to walk for two months.

o Increased regulation of civil law. I haven't sued Lipitor, but if I did there is a cap on what they would pay in damages. Because of that, corporate bean counters everywhere can measure a specific level or economic risk in rushing unsafe drugs and products into commerce.

[indypete]

Lipitor would also counter-sue you for slander or somesuch, thus draining your ability to fight your own suit. Their lawyers are on staff and get paid either way, so they might as well work 'em. Nobody ever seems to bring up the "hidden taxes" you mention... one would think it would be a useful weapon against the lies of the neocons.

[NotWithObamaCampaign]

SLAPP motion against slander suit would add some money to my damages. What's your point? Do you think the drug companies do disclose or are required to disclose side effects? Play this game. Google side effects and enter forums where people tell their tales. We now have scores of unsafe drugs in commerece.

Forgot to mention:

o health care premiums up 250%

o utility bill went from $20/mo to $60 (under Enron) to $30 -- still a 50% increase

[MsYellowDog]

Doesn't everyone see that Bush-Cheney have been aiming at one thing,and one thing only,for all their term: complete control of all government agencies and bureaucracies by the Right Wing,the so-called "Neocons",the Religious Right....and the eventual development of a religion-based "test for citizenship and privileges" ruled by a single party---the Rethuglicans.By cleverly manipulating the press,who have become nothing but lapdogs,and repeating their poisonous message over and over until everyone "believes" it,they have succeeded in convincing Americans that any disagreement with their policies constitutes "treason" or "not supporting the troops."How have these reptiles gained this kind of power over the American people?Refer to "Animal Farm" for more into: "Two legs bad;four legs good."

[majorteddy]

Gas was $146.9 when George W. Bush took office. It took exactly 4 months and it went up 25 cents. Amazing how demand takes gas up 16 percent in one day! Bush Chene should be tried for war crimes and crimes against society.

[hopefulinpa]

I think now that the convention is here and when it is over a lot more people will be paying attention. Obama/Biden will fight back hard.. I think O was just saving it for when the majority of people are watching. I hope he literally beats the snot out of him.

I work with a guy who is backing McBush.. I asked why and he said that he is a POW, a veteran and the vets love him... I sent him McBush's veteran's voting record. When I told him about it he looked shocked! I don't know how this guy is going to vote, but I am glad I could present to him the facts on McBushs voting record. I also told him how he has consistently voted against women's issues. He could not believe it! All this needs to be put out there front and center in super big type. I would like it if some rich organization could print those facts up and distribute them in some of the states!

[clsmithj]

A lot is the media that failed to focus on both candidates. They mainly looked at Obama and let McCain off Scott free. McCain has a lot dissenters in his party that know he's a fraud, but their good at concealing their drama, unlike the Democrats.

But look at this what I found on McCain from just doing a quick youtube search: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1682433/board/thread/115720537?d=115720537#115720537

[surfcitysteven]

Interesting article in the Sunday paper here in NM and I believe it is the key to landslides in New Mexico and Colorado for Obama. He will have to write off Texas and Arizona, which are already in the bag for McCain. Seems McCain was stupid enough to suggest that Arizona needs to be given more water from the upper basin states of Colorado and New Mexico ( and Utah but who cares). Believe me you people from other parts of the country, there is no other single issue as important to us here in these two states, even among the staunchest right wing bible-thumper here, God, gays and guns will take a very distant second in priority when a presidential candidate says he wants to give away your water. Nothing pisses us off more than having to give even one drop of our water to Texas and Arizona and now the downstreamers have a candidate that wants to rewrite the water compacts in their favor. Obama needs to hit hard on this issue. NM and CO will drop out of the "tossup" category in a week.

[vallon]

Interesting. I hope an Obama staffer reads this. Try to spread the message far and wide.

[surfcitysteven]

He made the comment to the Denver Post last week, apparently not realizing how stupid it was to discuss a water issue and how it could be better drawn (Arizona) getting the benefit of course. The New Mexican had an editorial on it today. I think the issue is a keeper for Obama.

[myhomeo]

You can be sure tht if we're reading it Obama's staff is reading it.

[MargaretO]

I wouldn't write off Arizona, just yet, either.

I see very little McCain enthusiasm in Phoenix. He couldn't even garner enough people to hold his fundraiser in the Civic Center, they had to move it to a Scottsdale friends home.
I haven't seen a single bumper sticker or sign posted for him.
McCain hasn't reached anywhere near 50% in the polls in Arizona, yet.

Granted, I have only seen what's going on in the Phoenix area, but it is a large majority of the population in Arizona.

[Donnat]

Interesting. I am n Texas and I am only just now seeing a few McCain stickers/signs. The Obama signs/stickers have been plentiful since the primary

[Avembe]

We ALL know that what Obama is doing is just EXCEPTIONNAL, HISTORICAL
So many politicians admire the guy but they just can't show it too much...
America has an incredible chance to have a guy like him...No matter what happens, he has ALREADY cHANGED politics in the country...
But i prefer that he wins, that would be...GOSH...think about it guyz...that would be you know...
i also wish to see haters faces at that moment!!!!!!!!!!Oh my GOD!!!!!!!

[tel8034]

The most telling statement that Obama made in this article is that:

PEOPLE ALWAYS UNDERESTIMATE HIM ............................ That is his real strength.

People should understand that BEING KIND, COMPASSIONATE AND MANNERLY DOES NOT MEAN THAT A PERSON IS WEAK................... Obama just picks the time and place for his battles, and is confident enough to understand that it is not necessary to pull the trigger everytime he hears a noise.

McCain who has been little self esteem, and has never achieved anything on his own merit, seems to believe that being a BULLY = STRENGTH.

Obama is 47 years old, and for him to achieve what he has done already in his life, certainly proves he is NOT WEAK.

Bill Clinton was YOUNGER than Obama when he ran for President in 1992, and the same can be said about him................... Clinton was not weak then and he isn't weak now.

[Jenai]

Well said and so true

[myhomeo]

There's a big difference between talking tough and actually being tough.

[GunneraGirl]

I've noticed all my adult life that somehow being kind and warm-hearted is to be assumed weak, and even stupid, by certain sorts of people. And that certain sorts of people assume that being a bully is to have a spine, and even moral fortitude. (Hence, in part, Dubya for President)

But all that is going to change with an Obama Presidency...

We tend to think a presidency is solely an 'administrative position' but it's more than that: the Presidency exerts an effect on the tone and tenor of the country and its cultural behaviors. I'm looking forward to our Renaissance.

[EricHayes]

Your observations seem to be particularly true in North America. That's why Obama is getting such positive reaction from the other nations in the World, and McCain's getting lukewarm acceptance.

[foxbat]

Very well-said! I think it takes a stronger person to be kind, compasionate, respectful ESPECIALLY when it is seen as weak or in the face of those who don't return the favor.

[tinalina61]

O is doing the best he can, given the 'catch 22' situation he finds himself in. I work with a woman whose a Republican, and she feel that O is an 'angry black man.' I ask her really" She said yes, and that's why she's voting for McCain--See, it's crazy notions like the person I work with that worry/scare me. O is FAR from being an ANGRY black male IMHO--In fact, he can be darn right docile, too polite and very non-combative, and this sometimes gets on my nerves, because he wouldn't fight back at certain times when he was being 'slimed' by camp McCain.

However in the past week, O's rhetoric HAS gotten pointed and he is talking about economics and fighting back. And once again, my co-workers take is different. She says O is "Acting VERY unstable, and doesn't have the temperament to be president." I asked her if read about or if she's seen McCain's temper in action? And she'll only say "He's been a POW, so I can understand WHY he gets a bit angry at times." Not ONLY do a lot of folks think like this woman I work with, but unfortunately all too many of them give cover to McCain acting any way he feels like acting, which is rude, and short-tempered.

The getting a pass' by so many in the public simply because McCain was a POW is SAD and another story all together.

[Avembe]

HELLOOOOOOO tinalina!!!!
it's obvious...the guy is running for the presidency, and he is black meaning ,he is challenging, he is not at his place, he is elitist, he despised HRC etc etc etc...

[PlainBread]

It just means one thing, if a person doesn't like O because he's black (any black person would be easily perceived by many non-black as 'angry' and 'unstable'.), she/he will always find something for an excuse not to like him. O realized this a long time ago, that's why his campaign has been working very hard on the streets and on the internet (two areas where racists aren't comfortable getting in), reaching millions of [young] people who's not reached by most polls, mostly more educated and more blended in a heterogeneous society.

[gintheb]

My brother, the truth is you punch back following the olde Marquis de Queensbury rules of boxing, while the republicans rabbit puch, kidney puch, hit below the belt and when hit you raise your hands to tap gloves at the begining of the round. Forget about boxing, you need to go UFC with these bullies

[myhomeo]

Two words for those who don't think he's hitting back hard enough - Jackie Robinson.

[Budokan]

Yes, he punches back, but he doesn't punch back hard enough. This is America. You don't defeat your opponent by loving him to death. You have to destroy him utterly. Obama doesn't understand that, yet, but maybe Biden can school him.

[BVictor1]

That's one problem with thinking in this country. Thinking that destroying someone is the only way to win. sometimes it's best to outsmart ones opponent.

[WoodyCPM]

If they're going to outsmart their opponent then they better get busy. Adlai Stevenson once remarked to a woman who called out to him after a campaign speech, "Mr. Stevenson, all of the smart people are voting for you." To which he replied with a second of hesitation, "Madam it will take a lot more than that."

[gintheb]

He understands, but he is trying to keep to his pledge of running a dignified campaign. The trouble is McCain said the same thing and has not even pretended to live up to it. One thing Barrack said during the primaries was that it was more important to win on his own terms, with dignity, decency and the integrity of his family, than to lose by lowering his standards.

[gigi09]

First of all...Obama is African American, and there are double standards in America! If he fights too hard then he is an angry militant...if he chooses diplomacy, then he is too soft. He has ran an awesome campaign, and he does not need to be schooled by anyone! Joe Biden can speak/fight on Obamas' behalf. As well as the Clintons...for they know the drill. For this to be the "Land of the Free" believe me... we ALL ain't free! There are double standards that accomodates and feeds into the racism that ultimately controls America and the Democratic Party!. Obama/Biden 08!

[ZenSufi]

As an African-American, Obama has to be careful not to seem too aggressive, because then he becomes labeled "angry black man".

Now, Obama can let Biden be the "angry white man". Black anger is too threatening; American voters are more comfortable with white anger.