Barack Obama became president because he was a blank slate. As he wrote in The Audacity of Hope, “I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.” This worked well as a legislator voting present and a candidate running on “hope” and “change.” But it doesn’t work as well for a leader.

E.J. Dionne summed it up this way: “Obama has created the impression that he is taking things one decision at a time, without a passion for how he would like the country to look in the long run.”

President Obama either is a blank slate either because he doesn’t believe anything or because he thinks his beliefs are unpopular. Whatever the reason, though, the lack of an articulated vision from the president explains the widely divergent reactions to his policies.

Those on the right look at what got done and how and see a pattern of rejection of the rule of law, the desires of voters, and American tradition.

  • GM and Chrysler bondholders were thrown overboard in the bailouts.
  • Congress passed the health care law through parliamentary tricks after Massachusetts elected Scott Brown.
  • The Department of Justice sued Arizona over a state law, but would not prosecute a group over voter intimidation.

Those on the left, professional or otherwise, are confused by the angst on the Right.

A metro writer for the Washington Post letting his confusion meld with his disdain wrote,

In interviews with members of the crowd at the Lincoln Memorial, I found that many shared such an apocalyptic view of a country on the wrong track.

But when pressed for evidence of such severe deterioration, they didn’t offer very compelling examples. Basically, the “tea party” thinks the moderately liberal social agenda pushed by the Obama administration is just a short step away from, say, Communist East Germany.

They see, if anything, not a commitment to a more active government taking more power from individuals and local governments, but a president following the Bush agenda and trying to stay above the fray

His [Obama’s] relentless attachment to pragmatism and post-partisanship has muddled the Democrats? message. Even when he does something courageous?initially supporting Park 51, for example, he or his aides always seem to walk it back. Frustrated Democrats are urging Obama to present a theory of the case?a vision of what Democrats are for and how they’ll fight to get there?before it?s too late.

To lead is to choose. “When you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.” President Obama’s choices so far have made everyone uncomfortable. Is it worse to think he makes those choices because he is an ideologue or because they seem the most workable?