I found out when I went to a presentation on community psychiatry. I was listening to the principles and BINGO - I had the thought: "This is the Obama campaign!"

Later had a chance to tell the presenter, "Either you are advising the Obama campaign or they are channeling you." (He had a team of consultants.) I'm sure the ultimate goal is to heal the country.

I'm guessing this will continue. But I can't say for sure. It's been breathtaking to watch their campaign, how Obama responded to attacks etc.

The principles for how to help people cope after disasters of whatever type are what we need in the nation now. Again, my take based on what little I know here.

sorry about the double post. not sure what happened!

Ok, I'm feeling a bit better now. I've known a fair number of politicians, watched them, heard the stories from inside the doors. I suspect a lot of us have. And make no mistake, these leaders were GOOD people. Devoted their entire lives to working people, to helping people. Leaders who had vision.

But they all had serious flaws, weaknesses. And for a whole lot of psychological reasons that exist within the American populace today - just think back over what's happened these past 8 years - the response to Obama, even if he's done nothing in particular to trigger it, is quite unusual. And even has dangerous aspects to it. We ned to find some independent, solid ground, within ourselves, to view some of this. In fact, even to feel what's happening WITHIN ourselves. Because I feel it too. It's not simply "cometh the hour, cometh the man." This dance is partly about US, and what we want to see. Any politician in the world will tell you that. And Obama's pretty much spelled it out.

So when I read of his Cabinet choices, my reaction is precisely as yours Tom. I work in economics a lot, and Summers is a lot of things, but few people would describe him as a particularly "good" or caring man. And his track record has not shown his ability to move freely of the opinions of the powerful. Geithner? We've seen his actions in the Bail-Out, and there are certainly some questions there. Gates? He was up to the armpits in Iran-Contra under Reagan, and advocated the bombing of Nicaragua.

But seeing this, many Obama supporters are responding with... "trust him." No "hand-wringing." No "whining." Well, fine. I don't like whining or being untrusting or wringing my hands. But this is life, not checkers. I'm not putting my own thinking on the end table for the next 8 years. Sorry. And facts is facts. If those SAME people had been hired by Bush? Wow. Imagine the blogs. But right now it's... If he hires new people, great.... Hires old, great. Hires the powerful, great. Hires outsiders, great.

After a bit, I've come to feel that I'm dealing with peoples' OWN psychological stuff here. They're not actually saying or thinking or adding anything about the people being chosen - it's all bound into what they hope about Obama. Well, I share those hopes. But to let it color things that far seems a bit "off" to me.

There's recent history here. Most Americans never had a chance to see or hear Blair up close. Brilliant man. Well-spoken. Warm. Bipartisan. Picked a Cabinet full of extraordinary minds. Willing to experiment. Brought in brilliant young people. but he wss also able to work, slowly, with the powers that be. And he got absolutely enormous things done in Britain, halving child poverty, minimum wage, rebuilding schools and hospitals, opening the country up, giving government to Scotland and Wales, peace in Northern Ireland, right? Won 3 terms.

Yet anybody close to him always said there was something mysterious about him. Unknowable. Different. But... could never place it. Until Iraq. When they could. The pieces clicked into place. go look at the list sometime, of the people close to him - Staffers, Ministers & others - who fled. Literally, left their jobs. Because by then, he was too powerful, had brought too many people onboard, and the war couldn't be stopped.

I'm not saying Obama is Blair. He isn't. Nor that he'll lead us into war. I hope he won't. But I really think we're risking a lot, too much, to write of him s though he hasn't flaws. I'm not one to aid and abet the enemy or the GOP or the Freepers, I know what damage they can do. But we need to make sure that we repeat to ourselves, "Great guy, Obama. Talented. Good man. But as human as the rest of us. And since he may screw up, may not see things, may fall prey to any one of a dozen frailties... maybe we better pay attention, and speak up too."

And there's nothing wrong with that I think. Let's take him at his word. "Bottom-up." "We are the change." It's about us, not him." I think those messages should be taken with some seriousness.

Anyway, thanks for responding, Tom and Thera and Jason.

Let's look at the issue of "control." It's like "narcissism." Actually can be a positive or a negative, depending on the degree of it and how it's used. We all need healthy narcissism. And along with that is a healthy sense of control or need for control.

People who manipulate others are different than people who can read them to manage by motivating them, by enlisting their assistance, helping to get them on board.

I think the "Hitler" image in this case is way out of line. Yes, some people, like Obama, have a charismatic quality to them. That can be used for good or ill. You need to consider other traits and personality dynamics and not just one or another "quality" that worries you. So please let's drop the Hitler image here. Or you're going to stretch that image to where it becomes meaningless.

Going back to quinn's original question and Tom's way of answering it, I would not just evaluate how someone makes decisions. Tom is coming from a an "ego psychology" perspective I think. And he's represented that very well. I'm coming more from a relational perspective (though the specific term is "object relations"). And I'm not ruling out Tom's perspective at all - because that would be a part of it for sure. But I look at how a person relates - and not just today, but over the long term. How well someone sustains relationships and what kind of relationships that person sustains. I'm not going to write a treatise this morning - but if you look at bush, you see a man who likes to be in control of relationships - in the sense of total fealty, his way or the highway, he has to be the center of attention, doesn't want to answer to anyone or really improve himself, irresponsible, etc. (fill in the blanks!) With Obama you have a man who relates in depth, can deal with people who disagree with him, seeks out mentors and others who can provide both feedback and critiques. Yes, he may be a man who seems an enigma in some ways - upon whom people can project their own images (but of course we do that all the time, we're just not aware of it). But so is the Dalai Lama. A self-contained individual is not necessarily a negative. He's neither asocial nor alienated nor anti-social. He has a capacity for an inner life which we are not used to as Americans - certainly not in recent days. Why should this be a negative?

So whenever you consider any personality trait, remember to always look at the balance, at how things work in relationships, not just in making decisions. He has a conscience. He has empathy. (both sorely lacking in bush). He is introspective and also able to read people, listen to them, and yet not be controlled by them. When you consider "control," think about how someone does that and toward ends. I see Obama as very much wanting to enlist people to work together, motivating them. I don't see him wanting robots around him. He's not into manipulation.

We all need a healthy sense of autonomy, a healthy sense of narcissism. But we need empathy. We need the ability to cooperate. We need a conscience and sense of ethics and the ability to set aside our own needs at times for the general welfare.

I've watched this man for some time. Body language. Relationships. The qualities I've already mentioned. He's very balanced. He's human. I see evidence that he's either had good psychotherapy for personal growth reasons or has availed himself of spiritual disciplines which promote similar personal growth. Go back and read Plato's Republic and the idea of the philosopher king. Read some eastern philosophies related to ruling by Taoist principles. I see qualities of that kind of balance and skill in how he relates and approaches leadership.

I'm human too. So are we all. I think we are going to have a chance to see a rare individual. And I for one am prepared to do all that I can to assist him in being a good president. I can't define for you right now how I'll do that. But let's give him latitude to show us the best in himself. And let's give him latitude to bring forth the best in ourselves. Let's all be part of this transformation - becoming better persons ourselves - and trying to the best of our abilities to transform our nation as well.