What people don't understand is that LBJ worked in an environment when the Rs weren't in absolute lockstep opposition to anything he was trying to do.
In fact, taking the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a lot of conservadems i.e. Southern "Democrats" voted against it. But it was ok because there were liberal and moderate Rs that were receptive to the CRA that could more than make up the losses.
As you see below, Obama/Nancy Pelosi/Harry Reid have lost fewer Democrats than Johnson and his leadership did.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_1964By party
The original House version:<9>
* Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
* Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)
Cloture in the Senate:<10>
* Democratic Party: 44-23 (66%-34%)
* Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
The Senate version:<9>
* Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%-31%)
* Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
The Senate version, voted on by the House:<9>
* Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
* Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%)
--------------------------------------------
In the "original house version" stage of HCR, Obama lost only 39 Democrats, whereas LBJ lost nearly 100 Democrats for CRA.
On the senate side, Obama will, at worst, lose 3 Dems for cloture (hopefully none) and 8 Dems on the underlying bill. LBJ lost 23 dems on cloture and 21 on the bill.
Imagine if, as to the CRA, all Republicans voted no. In the House, CRA would have lost 268 - 152, in the senate, it would have lost a cloture vote 56 against to 44 in favor and never made it to a final vote. The bill would have had to have been watered down so much as to make it acceptable to Southern "Democrats". Fortunately LBJ did NOT have to kowtow to Southern "Democrats". This is essentially and unfortunately, what Obama has to do in regard to HCR.
But fortunately for us, LBJ had a reasonable Republican opposition party who did not have a strategy to disrupt any and all progress for political advantage. He governed before the rise of movement conservatism, Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and most importantly, 1994.
I cannot emphasize this next point enough so I am going to write it in bold:
The Republicans are going to do everything they can to block anything Obama tries to do because they believe that the public will become so disillusioned with the Democrats that there will be another 1994-style "revolution" that will vault them back into power. They are counting on the left base of the Democratic Party becoming frustrated and staying home in 2010. They are hoping that Obama DOESN'T come through in this difficult situation that THEY THEMSELVES created and continue to create, and that people will blame him and the Democrats and not the Republicans. They are hoping people will ignore that they are voting against and filibustering EVERYTHING. The GOP's strategy cannot be allowed to work in 2010. If it does, then they will do it AGAIN the next time they mess everything up and the country hands power back to the Democrats. Next time you get frustrated at Obama, think about how much easier his job would be if he had a reasonable opposition party like LBJ did, or think about how lucky LBJ was to get 138 House Rs and 27 Senate Rs for CRA. I'm not saying don't be constructively critical, but don't go around fomenting disillusionment. That's EXACTLY what the Rs want you to do.
So, you wanna talk about LBJ? Once there is a world where Obama does not need to please the Joe Liebermans or the Bart Stupaks of the world or face utter failure, THEN you can compare him to LBJ.