The Duquesne Duke

Issue date: 4/30/09 Section: Opinions

President Barack Obama's first 100 days in office brought about a slew of changes in Washington. And even if those changes were ill-received by some, they were at least visible; they happened.

Within 100 days, the Obama administration decided to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility in a year, reversed the ban on stem cell research, pushed a $787 billion stimulus package through Congress, established a timeline for withdrawal from Iraq, ordered more troops to Afghanistan, and released memorandums detailing the torture techniques C.I.A. officers used to obtain information from suspected terrorists.

The American people reacted to Obama's first days in a variety of ways. Moral conservatives showed outrage at the stem cell research decision. Economic conservatives called the stimulus package wasteful, and liberals to the far left said the bill wasn't enough.

The biggest change did not happen in Washington, but in the overall American perception of Obama. The uppercase "Change" in politics that Obama promised during his campaign seemed sweeping, and maybe even idealistic. To his supporters, the immense overhaul was desirable; to conservatives, it was threatening. But both of these perceptions proved to be a little skewed. Obama is a more pragmatic President than people expected.

Given the climate of economic doubt and uncertainty, pragmatism has its benefits. The stimulus bill had its critics, but it passed quickly and seemed to revolve more around action than ideology. Obama probably could have made the bill bigger, but it would have taken longer to pass, and he decided it was more important to act quickly rather than idealistically.

The downside of pragmatism is that Obama runs the risk of losing the faith of his ardent supporters, the ones who saw him as the harbinger of a new era in American politics. Obama has managed to curtail that risk, in part because of his tough stance on human rights issues.

Obama's human rights stance was evident in his recent decision to release the C.I.A memos, revealing 266 instances in which the C.I.A. employed interrogation techniques, such as waterboarding, which the Obama administration defined as torture.

Of course, this decision was criticized as na've and dangerous, just like the stimulus plan was criticized as wasteful and counterproductive. But this time, Obama didn't bend.

The difference between Obama's actions regarding the economy and human rights issues seems contradictory at first, but a closer look reveals an underlying logic.

Obama is willing to negotiate what steps the government will take to improve the future of the country; he's proved he will "reach across the aisle." But when it comes to bureaucratic blunders that contradict the ideas of human rights and form the basis of liberal democracy, Obama is less willing to shift his views.

His logic is indicative of the democratic process as a whole: he has faith that dialogue and multilateralism lead to decisions, but he is unwilling to let the fundamental make-up of democracy slide.

A little more than a year ago, Obama visited the Petersen Events Center in Oakland for his campaign's last stop before the Pennsylvania primary election. During that rally, he said he was more concerned with talking to people who opposed his views than ones who supported them. The fact that he said this into a crowd full of supporters, who broke up his speech by chanting "Yes We Can," made that statement a little less than believable.

But after Obama's first 100 days, he has proven he is more willing to be bipartisan and pragmatic than idealistic and exclusive.

Shawn Klocek is a senior English and journalism major and can be reached at kloceks@duq.edu.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools