The Facts on the Ground
- President Barack Obama was elected in an atmosphere of chaos seeking change.
- At inauguration, President Obama scored extremely high in approval polls.
- As the honeymoon period draws to a close, President Obama's approval rating is dropping, indicating a growing dissatisfaction with policies put forth by his administration

Overview
The average person, observing the puffed up pride of America at the inauguration of President Barack Obama would have been tempted to buy into the hype that we had entered into a new age in America - an age when racial issues, poverty, ignorance and even climate change could be tackled with ease by our new leader and his best and brightest advisers. It seems that way at the beginning of most new administrations - when the headiness of the win overshadows the enormous task undertaken. We have now completed nearly 7 months of the Obama Administration, and the bloom, as the saying goes, is off the rose. President Obama and those serving in the executive with him are finding the truth of the maxim of Alexander the Great, who was arguably the most powerful man in the western world at the height of the Greek Empire - "Conquering is easy, governing is hard."

In a review of Obama's first few months, the American public is a bit less enthralled by the common man from Illinois, who has tried to claim the mantle of both Lincoln and Kennedy. Even with a solid majority in Congress, he has found that passing his agenda has been at first easy with poor results (the ARRA "stimulus plan" - which has turned out to be less about fixing issues in the economy important to the public at large, and more about spurring on pet projects packaged as economic fixes). Candidate  Obama spoke in feel good rhetoric that was easy to support. That support though resembled parts of the Mississippi River – a mile wide and ankle deep. Support for many things evaporated in the harsh light of public scrutiny. He has now moved onto passage being difficult as America decides that the change it wants is not necessarily the change that Obama is offering. With the economy limping along, home prices still depressed, jobless numbers still on the rise, America seems uninterested in issues like the "cap& trade" climate bill, and outright hostile to government involvement in the healthcare system. This follows Obama's controverisial decisions to involve the government in the banking / stock industry with a series of "oops!" (executive bonuses, shaming on company jets or meetings, and incorrect projections on the scope of the economic problem) and taking virtual control of the American automobile industry. What political capital Obama has is being spent as unwisely as many a government budget. This provides a crossroads window of opportunity for Obama. He can choose to lock out the Republican minority (who has been remarkably ineffectual as an opposition force, and devoid of alternate ideas - they might want to work on that) and force his agenda through as did FDR; or he can choose to concentrate on the issues that Americans care about on an everyday basis - a stable and growing economy, and a return to the prosperous times that we had become accustomed to prior to the collapse of the stock and housing markets. For that he will need the Republicans, who seem to be on the side of the American people as far as their concerns on healthcare tinkering, and in reflecting the mood of the country on the large deficits that occurred under Bush 43 now turning into massive deficits that will burden not only our generation, but our children, and there's as well.

We cite two paths that reflect the mood of the country at this time. During the period of upheaval of the early 1970s - a time of war, bad economy, growing inflation and unemployment, distrust of the government, Watergate - the country signaled that it wanted change by electing Jimmy Carter in 1976 as the Washington outsider who would "change" things in DC. Carter, a principled man, would not "make friends" in Congress, would not negotiate on his proposals, and would not bend in accommodation. Though enjoying a majority in Congress, members at the time enjoyed a bit of give and take with their Republican counterparts in the spirit of getting things done. Carter's methods did not work well on Capitol Hill and the situation in America deteriorated further. As Americans sought practical and prudent action, Carter, with the best of intentions, took too many issues on, made too few friends, and provided nuance instead of a clear plan. He was thought to be vacillating and indecisive in the face of crisis, and was turned out on the simple catchphrase of Ronald Reagan - "Are you better off now than you were four years ago?". America, clearly, was not.

After the Reagan years, and the continuation of them (sort of) with Bush 41, America was again in a sea of change. The economy was about to meet up with the Savings and Loan "crisis", we had won the cold war and Gulf War I, but we had lost our identity. Being a lone superpower brought about a quest to define who America was in this new world situation - new thinking and new leadership was sought for a new time. Change again was the theme. Enter Bill Clinton with a bold agenda to remake us in the world - economic success, world peace, universal healthcare, and "two chickens in every pot". Clinton started with several initiatives on the environment, gay rights and the infamous Hillary health commission - and the electorate who backed Clinton as an agent of change, backed away and delivered him a Republican controlled House of Representatives in 1994. Clinton, at his crossroads looked to the example of Carter doggedly fighting for his agenda, and saw how badly it ended. Clinton decided on accommodation and cooperation with the Republicans and accomplished quite a bit with a prosperous economy, several free trade agreements, and the jewel of the Clinton presidency - welfare reform which brought record numbers of previously "unemployable" people into the workforce earning good pay. Clinton chose to pursue a constructive course relevant to the American public and was rewarded with a more generous assessment from history than Carter.

Common Sense Dictates
President Obama stands at a similar crossroads now. The rancorous extreme wings of his own party and that of the Republicans do not reflect the views of the vast majority of Americans - what Nixon termed the "great silent majority". America, as a society is far more conservative than the extreme left would have us believe, and far more liberal than the far right is comfortable with. Most Americans will support initiatives that stress personal responsibility aided with temporary assistance to achieve that personal responsibility. Most Americans do not see or even want the government to be our caretaker, but they do see a responsibility for those who have achieved to reach back and pull more forward. The American public holds the reasonable and prudent course of action.

Obama strives to project this harmony with the great silent majority, but he just can't seem to carry it off. His slide in the polls is typical of a president as the honeymoon phase ends, but the trend is pointing downward rather than to leveling off. It is reflective of the mind of America that in general, we want to be better, but in the specifics we want to be careful as to how we proceed. Wholesale changes to how "things are done" in America provide unease and fear rather than purposefulness. Compounding his error, people do not want to be sold on an idea that they just don't want. "If we just educate them, they will see that we are right" is a patronizing, and insulting attitude. Americans understand issues such as climate change, healthcare and immigration. They have ideas that need airing and discussion - not suppression or denial of validity. No one feels vindication for their ideas by a party line vote win - especially in a country divided near the 50% mark. The changing of major parts of the structure of American society requires the consent of an overwhelming majority of Americans - Democrats, Republicans and Independents. To do otherwise is to impose a tyranny of the majority on a sizable minority – which runs counter to the ideals of this country, and to Common Sense.