(Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

By Andre Showell

It’s perhaps one of the most overused words ever to enter the American English vernacular: swagger. And more times than not, the word is used inappropriately. But if you had the chance to see President Obama’s first post-election White House news conference, you were seeing the word “swagger” exemplified.

It had very little to do with the way he walked or talked or his style of dress.  The president’s swag during his first second-term presser was a testament to what appears to be a new attitude. He seemed to shrug off his excessively polite, methodical, careful demeanor for a more opinionated, forceful and at times abrupt manner.

No example showed off the president’s swag more than his approach to one question about whether he would deter from nominating U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice to the Secretary of State post amid Republican threats to block her nomination because of her handling of the recent attacks in Benghazi.

The president was sure-footed and resolute in his defense of Rice saying, “Let me say specifically about Susan Rice, she has done exemplary work.  She has represented the United States and our interests in the United Nations with skill and professionalism and toughness and grace.”

Critics had questioned whether a White House with such a reputation for putting only the most drama-free candidates before Congress would stand by Rice now that she finds herself in the hot seat.

But the most swagger-filled moment came shortly after President Obama’s defense of Rice when he gave the following retort: “As I’ve said before, she made an appearance at the request of the White House in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her. If Senator McCain and Senator Graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. And I’m happy to have that discussion with them. But for them to go after the U.N. Ambassador, who had nothing to do with Benghazi, and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received, and to besmirch her reputation is outrageous.”

I, for one, was pretty amazed that the president would stare Congress in the face, gangster-style and dare them to come after him. In so many words, he said he’d take a bullet if he had to so that a trusted appointee would not have to take the fall.

Is this a new President Obama? Without fear of making a re-election snafu, has he found his new stride? And is he emboldened to be more declarative and get a little gangsta now that he has received a new mandate to govern? If his performance in his first press conference is any indication of how he will proceed during the second term, we could be seeing a new side of President Obama, one defined by a new, yet fitting incarnation of the word “swagger.”

BET Politics – Your source for the latest news, photos and videos illuminating key issues and personalities in African-American political life, plus commentary from some of our liveliest voices.  Click here to subscribe to our newsletter.

(Photo: Courtesy of the CBC)

Our Director of News, Deborah Creighton Skinner sent me an article recently that caused me to take a second look.  The headline which read: “The Late Great Congressional Black Caucus” was alarming enough to get my attention.

For the past few months, I’ve been conducting intimate, sit-down interviews with members of the Congressional Black Caucus for an upcoming BET.com feature called, “Congressional Confidential,”  and it has given me an acute awareness of the CBC’s value and the role its members have played in raising the temperature of an often tepid body of lawmakers.

For this reason, the prospect of seeing a possible end to the CBC was disturbing to me so I read further.  The article is actually a commentary about the potential inclusion of three Black Republicans to the CBC’s membership ranks.  The article asserts that should the CBC include the viewpoints of right-wing conservatives, somehow its purpose is diminished and it’s standing as the “conscience of the Congress” is jeopardized.

My question is, how can the CBC be weakened if the overwhelmingly progressive, liberal body includes more diversity in its membership?  African-Americans are not monolithic. Although a vast majority of Blacks align with the Democratic Party, a sizable segment has found a home with the GOP.  The inclusion of Republicans within the CBC would not only be more reflective of a group of people it prides its self in representing, it would also be strengthened in the process.

The fear of an opposing viewpoint is just pointless.  If “progress” is truly the root of the progressive movement, then there is no need to be afraid of ideological stances that don’t exactly sing from the same songbook. To alienate Republican members of Congress is miss out on an opportunity to expand, and to influence others.  So when it comes, to embracing Republicans within the CBC, I say, the more the merrier.

(Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

By many accounts, the polling data pitches the upcoming presidential lesson as too close to call to declare a definitive front-runner. The country is so narrowly divided that there is no discernible way to know who the likely victor will be. In the African American community, President Barack Obama continues to enjoy a sizeable if not, mammoth lead over his republican rival, Gov. Mitt Romney.

No doubt many of those in our largely African-American audience will be consumed with coverage about what it will take for President Obama to win the White House. But I wonder, if the polls are reflective of a truly tight race, what lessons can be learned if the election goes to Obama’s opponent. What is the lesson? What can be learned?

If Obama loses, I guess the first lesson is that it is lonely at the top and the tide can quickly turn. Just four years ago, the president was considered to be the media darling, the “rock star of the Senate.” Fast forward to 2012 and the president now faces an electorate that is noticeably more critical and vocally skeptical.

Another lesson is that “changing Washington” may be easier to say than it is to do. The Obama campaign’s “change” mantra piqued the idealistic leanings of the youth vote and the hopeful aspirations of Obama’s under-served supporters. But one thing the Obama administration soon found out when it came to White House is that the Washington machine is just that, a machine. This machine serves a purpose and while it can be upgraded or serviced, dismantling it, without an alternative, is simply not an option. If the engine doesn’t work, the car won’t move.

A third lesson to be learned in the event of an Obama loss, is tied to communicating with the American people. It’s not enough to believe that the people will intrinsically know a president’s intent. You have to tell them. Policy talk makes people tune out. But a political narrative that relates to voters’ lives, makes their ears perk up. Even the president admitted to learning this lesson recently during a CBS News interview. He said, “The mistake of my first term — couple of years — was thinking that this job was just about getting the policy right. And that’s important. But the nature of this office is also to tell a story to the American people that gives them a sense of unity and purpose and optimism, especially during tough times.”

So until there is a clear and decisive front-runner, it is not a bad idea to think about what’s next; to consider each moment, whether victory or defeat, as a moment to take note, grow and hopefully make life better in the process.