Despite Major Plans, Obama Taking Softer Stands

President Obama is well known for bold proposals that have raised expectations, but his administration has shown a tendency for compromise and caution, and even a willingness to capitulate on some early initiatives. Full Story »

Posted by Leo Romero
Tags Help
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Leo Romero - Apr 19, 2009 - 7:34 AM PDT
Content Type: Article
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Leo Romero - Apr 19, 2009 - 7:34 AM PDT

Reviews

Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Patricia L'Herrou
3.0
by Patricia L'Herrou - Apr. 19, 2009

the writer makes the case that pres. obama has compromised on quite a bit of what he's asked for so far. he includes sources who confirm that and those that disagree. the problem is that there's not much of a story here at this point.

See Full Review » (11 answers)
Kenneth Sibbett
4.0
by Kenneth Sibbett - Apr. 19, 2009

An article that tries to have it both ways. He's either afraid to take on congress. or he's hiding in the woods, waiting to pounce. There is such a thing as having a strategy. Give and receive. Bush didn't have to give up anything , he had Congress in his pocket.

I personally think Obama is doing an excellent job, considering what he was left.

See Full Review » (12 answers)
Jack Dinkmeyer
1.9
by Jack Dinkmeyer - Apr. 19, 2009

An “on the fence, off the fence” article. Considering Obama’s achievements rolling back Bushie B.S., and his diplomatic triumphs in face of Bush’s diplomatic failures, he seems to be doing well. The big fights lie still ahead. Perhaps he can use the Bushie technique of the majority party pushing its agenda through the Senate. The same techniques 19th century NO Republicans are now criticizing him for?. Considering the last president, is it not premature to judge this one? Let him get his sea legs, then criticize.

I dislike articles like this. In case no one understands, politics is the art of compromise. But then, given the Bushie years, one can be forgiven for forgetting compromise.

See Full Review » (20 answers)
Leo Romero
3.0
by Leo Romero - Apr. 19, 2009
See Full Review » (1 answer)
Nate Helton
2.8
by Nate Helton - Apr. 21, 2009

While this article does display some characteristics of good journalism, it also comes off as biased and untrustworthy. The overall attitude of the article and the author's way of portraying the facts look to be misleading.

See Full Review » (11 answers)
Alexandra Counts
2.4
by Alexandra Counts - Apr. 23, 2009

I thought the author seemed biased against Obama. He didn't go into great detail on Obama's side or investigate why the president is being cautious. It was too one-sided.

See Full Review » (6 answers)
Alan MacDonald
2.5
by Alan MacDonald - Apr. 19, 2009

Reporting, no analysis

Obama “taking softer stands”, despite his “big plans” and his famous ‘hope’ for ‘change’, will end badly for very easily understood reasons --- which precisely parallel Bill Clinton’s legacy of failure. The following was my earlier diagnosis of Clinton’s (and the Democratic Party’s) error in the lead letter to the Boston Globe (Jan. 2001) in response to their 1/19 editorial “Bill Clinton’s Legacy?”: “Clinton's legacy? It will be as the Neville ... More »

See Full Review » (7 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

2.9

Average
from 8 reviews (50% confidence)
Quality
2.9
Facts
3.3
Fairness
3.0
Information
2.5
Insight
1.0
Sourcing
2.8
Style
3.2
Accuracy
2.0
Balance
2.0
Context
3.0
Depth
2.7
Enterprise
3.2
Expertise
1.0
Originality
1.0
Relevance
4.0
Transparency
1.0
Responsibility
3.0
Popularity
3.0
Recommendation
2.7
Credibility
3.2
# Reviews
4.0
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!