Aloof?

Congressional voices have labeled President Obama aloof. I don’t agree. Here’s why.

First, the definition of ‘aloof’: not friendly or forthcoming; cool and distant.

"they were courteous but faintly aloof"; synonyms: distant, detached, unfriendly, antisocial, unsociable, avoidant, remote, unapproachable, formal, stiff, withdrawn, reserved, unforthcoming, uncommunicative, unsympathetic; [Google reference.

My take on this? Obama is anything but aloof. He comes across to me as engaged, caring, relaxed, intellectually attuned to both the moment and the long term significance of what’s happening right now.

President Obama is a thinker, reader, student of history, and a trained lawyer. He understands context of issues. His focus is on the long term solution and sustainability of those solutions. His is not a short term focus mentality.

He is also friendly, hospitable and humorous. He is not stuffy.

In short he is the kind of person I want in the White House. I also think he suffers fools badly. Perhaps that is what the ‘congressional’ voices are expressing?

Second, I suspect a definition of congressional personality by the President would be this: not engaged in the real work of their office; consistently playing power games and shirking responsibility of their tasks.

I don’t think such a definition of congress is aloof. The reality is worse than that.

I’ve said it in past blogs and I will say it again here: America faces many problems. Not all can be fixed or properly attended to in an instant or all at the same time. They must be prioritized and then studied for determining the best solutions.

To accomplish this, however, requires a team of people willing to seriously engage in this work and find it necessary to collaborate with each other to accomplish tasks successfully. It will not be done in any other way.

Every corporation or large institution understands and values the methods, systems, and human resources required to accomplish great things. Leadership is only one ingredient needed. Cooperation, however, is an enormous ingredient required for any success.

No one person has all the answers. No general. No President. No senator or congressman. Not even a clergyman, philosopher or esteemed academic.

Each of these has a part of the answer to common problems. But working together to supply workable answers comes from a willingness to lose the ‘self’ in the task of the common good.

If there is a sickness in America I think it is this: too much ego and not enough cooperation. Greed of money and power has warped our nation critically. This is not group behavior; it is individual behavior. And it destroys group. It destroys organizations. And yes, it has destroyed nations: Germany, Poland, Russia, Libya, Egypt, Palestine, many nations of Africa, and the Roman Empire. That is naming just a few examples of nations lost in chaos and the dust of history.

A nation needs leaders, those who care enough about the common good to set aside their personal wants and aches in order to serve the larger good. A President needs to demonstrate leadership, but that does not require a whip, chains, a loaded gun pointed at the heads of those who need to follow. No. leadership requires a cool head, an understanding of historical context, an appreciation for social policy and values, and an intelligent statement of the problem and the need to fix it.

Obama has done all of those things. But congress was at play, not at the nation’s business. They have failed the country. They have enjoyed a feast of personal luxuries while blaming inaction on the one and only person who has demonstrated the intellect and humanity to get the job done.

A nation is not just its President. Or its congress or parliament. A nation is its people. And a government is authorized by the people to get the necessary tasks accomplished.

Who’s doing their job? Who is not?

I think the record is very clear.

July 29, 2014