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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Reporting, no analysis