There were ostensibly throngs of people who were in love with Obama because they did think he would cure every one of their problems.  The vast majority of those people are politically novice or ignorant--they don't know that the Congress passes laws, they don't know about the history of Wall Street regulations or the CIA or medicare, they don't follow politics any more than watching the occasional ad during election season, the first presidential debate, and/or gossipy issues (people know that Palin's team overspent on clothes, they know that Obama bowls poorly, they know that "that gay guy from, like, Iowa or wherever, had a wide stance in the bathroom," and they have never heard of Mitch McConnell or Kathleen Sebelius.)  Those people may have lost the feeling of newness that Obama brought a year ago, but they largely are still not paying attention, so either they still love him or they don't, but it is largely irrelevant.  These people are not about to start voting for Club for Growth Conservatives in 2010 or for the freak parade of GOP hopefuls in 2012.

The people who are paying attention largely did not have a "Messiah" complex as regards Obama.  They figured he would be a great president who would be on the side of the people and usher in a new age of productive, re-juvenating policies.  But in theory, people should think that of anyone they elect.  You don't have to be thought of as "Messianic" just because you project a better country under your leadership than under the previous leadership.  If you remember, Bush promised to restore "honor" to the White House, promised to carry forth the strong and humble ideals of America, promised not to engage in expensive programs we couldn't pay for, promised not to nation-build.  People just reasonably expected that Obama might keep a few of _his_ promises.  Not much to ask of a person, let alone a deity.

But people are at best quite nervous about Obama's presidency thus far.  No one (who is paying attention) believed that he would solve all eight major crises facing the US simultaneously (energy, health care, the economy, the nuclear terrorism threat, illegal immigration, education, manufacturing competitiveness, and the environment/climate) and also solve all social ills and restore the Constitution within 6 months.  But a) he is going in the wrong direction on a lot of these issues (handling the banks terribly, inexplicable decisions about the 4th amendment, gay rights, transparency, etc.), b) he seems very reluctant to push hard for almost any Progressive policies (EFCA, single payer health care, drug legalization, cutting the defense budget), c) he has once-in-a-political-lifetim e grass-roots and (mostly) media support AND a friendly Congress AND a decrepit opposition party, and so the clock is ticking very loudly, and d) most presidents get most of their big legislation done in the first year.  It is too distracting (usually) to try for something big during the run-up midterms and re-election season and then permanent lame-duck status.  So these weeks right now matter a ton more than the prospect of him finally getting to something big in March of 2012 or August of 2014 (assuming he is re-elected, which is likely).  6 months is an 8th of his entire first term, and he should be zipping along, giving us some inkling that he will be a good president, that he will do the right thing a year from now when he really _has_ had plenty of time to affect some change if he wants to.

  In addition, Washington is a slow-moving place--yes.  But Obama has the ability to executive-order many things he has not yet.  He could INSTANTLY affect some of the social issues.  He could INSTANTLY change military policy (he is the Commander in Chief).  He could instantly usher in greater transparency, or lean on the DOJ to prosecute torture, etc.  Do I wish Obama would "be more like Bush" when it came to unilaterally pushing through an agenda specifically designed to negate and remedy Bush's mistakes?  Absolutely!  The alternative is that those remedies die a slow, compromised, grandstanded, cowardly death on Harry Reid's desk every single time.  If you believe that Obama's judgment is generally good, why NOT want for him to occasionally use a stroke of the pen to improve the country immediately?

Star Trek the Next Generation was a pretty lousy show in the first season, as were Cheers and the Simpsons.  (Please, no complaints--I have a right to my opinion.)  A few shows take a while to hit their stride, and almost no show is "great" after 13 episodes.  But if you watch the first five episodes of a show and it just isn't compelling in any way, the odds that it will grow into genius are 1 in 1000.  You don't often say "well, let's watch for 4 years and then judge."--you have a pretty good idea from what you have seen thus far.  The seeds have to be of good quality to grow a good tree even if it takes a few years for us to see the tree.