Friday, January 30, 2009
The opposite of BDS
As foolish as the unrestrained hatred of 43 has been the enthrallment of 44 by his supporters, as chronicled here in the New York Times. The two moods are sides of the same coin, minted during the frustration of the 2000 election results and polished daily by the true believers of the Left. Now one of their own has the reins of government and the rest of us will pay the piper.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Munich redux
44 gave a 17 minute interview last night to Hisham Melhem of Al Arabiya TV last evening. Reaction in the mainstream media was generally muted and mildly positive. The AP story failed to comment on the portion of the interview that dealt with 44's promise to make a major speech in an Islamic nation within the first 100 days of his term.
Q Tell me, time is running out, any decision on from where you will be visiting the Muslim world?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I'm not going to break the news right here.
Q Afghanistan?
THE PRESIDENT: But maybe next time. But it is something that is going to be important. I want people to recognize, though, that we are going to be making a series of initiatives. Sending George Mitchell to the Middle East is fulfilling my campaign promise that we're not going to wait until the end of my administration to deal with Palestinian and Israeli peace, we're going to start now. It may take a long time to do, but we're going to do it now. We're going to follow through on our commitment for me to address the Muslim world from a Muslim capital.
By my calculation, 44 has until the end of April to fulfill that campaign promise.
Here is another snippet of the interview that opens a window into 44's mind:
THE PRESIDENT: I think it is possible for us to see a Palestinian state -- I'm not going to put a time frame on it -- that is contiguous, that allows freedom of movement for its people, that allows for trade with other countries, that allows the creation of businesses and commerce so that people have a better life.
And, look, I think anybody who has studied the region recognizes that the situation for the ordinary Palestinian in many cases has not improved. And the bottom line in all these talks and all these conversations is, is a child in the Palestinian Territories going to be better off? Do they have a future for themselves? And is the child in Israel going to feel confident about his or her safety and security? And if we can keep our focus on making their lives better and look forward, and not simply think about all the conflicts and tragedies of the past, then I think that we have an opportunity to make real progress.
And again:
Q They[Zawahiri and bin Laden] seem very nervous, exactly. Now, tell me why they should be more nervous?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think that when you look at the rhetoric that they've been using against me before I even took office --
Q I know, I know.
THE PRESIDENT: -- what that tells me is that their ideas are bankrupt. There's no actions that they've taken that say a child in the Muslim world is getting a better education because of them, or has better health care because of them.
Here 44 is taking the line that the Arab-Israeli conflict is about the Palestinians wanting a place to conduct business and trade and that the jihadists will fail to gain support because they aren't building schools and clinics for the people of Afghanistan. The counter argument to that point of view is that the Arab/Palestinian point of view is a tribalist one that is fighting for the annihilation of Israel and the West because they are infidels and non-believers. 44 is adopting a Kumbaya vision of the world as a place that will operate in harmony if we just sit down peacefully and talk. This is in spite of all the historical evidence to the contrary. Bin Laden doesn't want clinics and schools unless they are run by Sharia law. If a westerner shows up, no matter if he is Christian, Jew or atheist, he will sooner or later be killed. If the Palestinians merely wanted to live in peace with the Israelis, they could have been doing so 60 years ago. Instead, they insist through their leaders and their actions that they seek the elimination of the Jewish state so they can continue to live a hand to mouth subsistence existence as they have for thousands of years. Their wealthy Arab "brothers" in the oil producing states understand this, which is why they have never offered the Palestinians even temporary refuge. They will produce money to fund terrorism, but not a dime for economic betterment.
44's approach seems to parallel that of Neville Chamberlain as he negotiated away the freedom of Czechoslovakia with Adolf Hitler in the name of "peace in our time."
Q Tell me, time is running out, any decision on from where you will be visiting the Muslim world?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I'm not going to break the news right here.
Q Afghanistan?
THE PRESIDENT: But maybe next time. But it is something that is going to be important. I want people to recognize, though, that we are going to be making a series of initiatives. Sending George Mitchell to the Middle East is fulfilling my campaign promise that we're not going to wait until the end of my administration to deal with Palestinian and Israeli peace, we're going to start now. It may take a long time to do, but we're going to do it now. We're going to follow through on our commitment for me to address the Muslim world from a Muslim capital.
By my calculation, 44 has until the end of April to fulfill that campaign promise.
Here is another snippet of the interview that opens a window into 44's mind:
THE PRESIDENT: I think it is possible for us to see a Palestinian state -- I'm not going to put a time frame on it -- that is contiguous, that allows freedom of movement for its people, that allows for trade with other countries, that allows the creation of businesses and commerce so that people have a better life.
And, look, I think anybody who has studied the region recognizes that the situation for the ordinary Palestinian in many cases has not improved. And the bottom line in all these talks and all these conversations is, is a child in the Palestinian Territories going to be better off? Do they have a future for themselves? And is the child in Israel going to feel confident about his or her safety and security? And if we can keep our focus on making their lives better and look forward, and not simply think about all the conflicts and tragedies of the past, then I think that we have an opportunity to make real progress.
And again:
Q They[Zawahiri and bin Laden] seem very nervous, exactly. Now, tell me why they should be more nervous?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think that when you look at the rhetoric that they've been using against me before I even took office --
Q I know, I know.
THE PRESIDENT: -- what that tells me is that their ideas are bankrupt. There's no actions that they've taken that say a child in the Muslim world is getting a better education because of them, or has better health care because of them.
Here 44 is taking the line that the Arab-Israeli conflict is about the Palestinians wanting a place to conduct business and trade and that the jihadists will fail to gain support because they aren't building schools and clinics for the people of Afghanistan. The counter argument to that point of view is that the Arab/Palestinian point of view is a tribalist one that is fighting for the annihilation of Israel and the West because they are infidels and non-believers. 44 is adopting a Kumbaya vision of the world as a place that will operate in harmony if we just sit down peacefully and talk. This is in spite of all the historical evidence to the contrary. Bin Laden doesn't want clinics and schools unless they are run by Sharia law. If a westerner shows up, no matter if he is Christian, Jew or atheist, he will sooner or later be killed. If the Palestinians merely wanted to live in peace with the Israelis, they could have been doing so 60 years ago. Instead, they insist through their leaders and their actions that they seek the elimination of the Jewish state so they can continue to live a hand to mouth subsistence existence as they have for thousands of years. Their wealthy Arab "brothers" in the oil producing states understand this, which is why they have never offered the Palestinians even temporary refuge. They will produce money to fund terrorism, but not a dime for economic betterment.
44's approach seems to parallel that of Neville Chamberlain as he negotiated away the freedom of Czechoslovakia with Adolf Hitler in the name of "peace in our time."
Monday, January 26, 2009
Mr.44's War
The war in Iraq has receded from the limelight as the US news media have effectively ended their coverage of events taking place. A search of the New York Times the other day revealed only this item about 44 meeting with some of his advisors about his plan to withdraw US troops within 16 months. Perhaps a latter day Captain Ahab needs to affix a gold sovereign, or whatever coin was used in Moby Dick to the mainmast and award it to the first sharp eyed reader who spots the word "victory" in any document produced by any politician of the Democrat persuasion. To be sure, victory in Iraq must be tempered by the realization that it is an unstable republican for whom democratic institutions are a new experience. There will be violence and turmoil for some time. But the aims of the Bush administration to midwife the birth of a viable alternative to the ruthless dictatorship of Saddam appear to be striking the target. Visions of an apocalyptic retreat from the embassy roof are going to have to be placed on hold, forever, one hopes. Yet there does not appear to be any joy in the writings of the opponents of the war. One senses an air of disappointment, almost, that the surge of troops into the country in 2007, succeeded in turning the tide. CBS News broadcast a report alleging that veterans committed suicide at a much higher rate than the general population, with the obvious inference that the [immoral] war in Iraq had transformed any number of mentally healthy soldiers into depressed, suicidal wrecks. A Columbia journalism professor writing on the Huffington Post went into great detail about how not only suicide, but homicides, sexual abuse and other maladies were all a direct consequence of the war. The CBS methodology attempted to separate suicides by non-veterans and veterans, which on the surface appears to be legitimate until one asks the question: what aged veterans are they talking about. Turns out the age group with the highest suicide rate in the country is males of 65 (29/100,000). Imagine how many of them are veterans? The CBS study implied that the Iraq war was an etiological factor, but really never addressed it from a statistical point of view.
Media reports on the carnage in Iraq are now relegated to the back pages. icasualties.org , a website that keeps track of military and civilian deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan, has counted four US military combat deaths so far this month. There have been nine deaths of US forces due to hostile fire or explosions in Afghanistan. Even as allegations of civilian deaths from coalition forces make their way into print, there has been no outpouring of outrage by the aggrieved doves in the US congressional delegations.
As the United States shifts more brigades into Afghanistan, watch what happens to the base of support 44 enjoys now as the body count increases and as more civilians die because terrorists use them as human shields. Finally, look how long it takes 44 to make any progress with the Gitmo detainees, especially if there are no countries willing to take them.
Media reports on the carnage in Iraq are now relegated to the back pages. icasualties.org , a website that keeps track of military and civilian deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan, has counted four US military combat deaths so far this month. There have been nine deaths of US forces due to hostile fire or explosions in Afghanistan. Even as allegations of civilian deaths from coalition forces make their way into print, there has been no outpouring of outrage by the aggrieved doves in the US congressional delegations.
As the United States shifts more brigades into Afghanistan, watch what happens to the base of support 44 enjoys now as the body count increases and as more civilians die because terrorists use them as human shields. Finally, look how long it takes 44 to make any progress with the Gitmo detainees, especially if there are no countries willing to take them.
Friday, January 23, 2009
The more things change....
....the more they stay the same. Here's what happened when a reporter from Politico tried to ask 44 a question in the White House press room the other day. Oh well, he's just learning how the system works. Quit being so hard on him.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Blackberry
44 has apparently arrived at a compromise that will allow him to use his beloved Blackberry device to communicate with some on his staff. Some of the technical and security issues are discussed at layperson level here. It is easy to think of some nightmare scenarios arising from a hostile force successfully hacking into his PDA. Whenever someone builds what appears to be an unbreakable code, someone else comes along and breaks it.
This has implications not only for the security of national intelligence, but also for the personal safety of the President. Just imagine the consequences if his wireless communication provided a physical target for terrorists with a SAM.
The other point to consider is the ultimate fate of the communications. By law public access to presidential communications, including e-mails, is guaranteed after a statuatory waiting period. 44 is aware of this, since he repealed a presidential order issued by 43 as an attempt to protect communications involving controversial firings in the Justice Department. This has nothing to do with the future text messaging habits of the First Daughters, that being a matter under control of the First Lady.
Update: here's another article on the same subject.
This has implications not only for the security of national intelligence, but also for the personal safety of the President. Just imagine the consequences if his wireless communication provided a physical target for terrorists with a SAM.
The other point to consider is the ultimate fate of the communications. By law public access to presidential communications, including e-mails, is guaranteed after a statuatory waiting period. 44 is aware of this, since he repealed a presidential order issued by 43 as an attempt to protect communications involving controversial firings in the Justice Department. This has nothing to do with the future text messaging habits of the First Daughters, that being a matter under control of the First Lady.
Update: here's another article on the same subject.
Mulligan
44 decided to pre-empt any small minds who might have seized on the inaccurate rendition of the Presidential oath to claim that he wasn't really President by taking the oath again in the presence of a camera and several witnesses. It wasn't clear who was ready to make the challenge, but like a careful attorney, he was leaving no room for an attempt.
There have been a number of lunatic theories advanced about 44 since he announced his candidacy. They have proliferated across the internet as fast as the so-called 9/11 truther websites, a 21st century equivalent to the JFK conspiracy theories. One of the more persistent rumors has been that 44 is not a natural born US citizen, that he was born in Kenya and his birth certificate was faked. The specific website at the link does not assert 44 was born outside the US, it only suggests that he may have been, the innuendo being more effective than an outright declaration in terms of creating doubt. The New York Times indulged in this sort of rumor mongering when it published an article that detailed hints and suspicions that Senator John McCain had a sexual relationship with a female lobbyist. No proof was offered by the article other than the allegation that some of his aides were worried about appearances. It was an effective way to smear the candidate without actually accusing him of wrongdoing, and he responded in anger, which was probably the goal of the writers in the first place. It's not likely the article had an effect on McCain's chances for election, although at the time (February 2008) he was still involved in the primary campaign and neither party had selected a standard bearer. The Times endorsed Hillary Clinton for the nomination before 44 used the Democrat's unique method of selecting delegates to sew up the nomination.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Party's Over
44 reported for his first full day of work and made some courtesy calls to middle eastern leaders as well as made good on one campaign promise: freezing any last minute changes in Federal regulations made by the outgoing administration and halting current prosecutions of Guantanamo detainees in anticipation of issuing an order to begin (somehow) to close the facility. What will happen to the still dangerous inmates is, of course, a matter of conjecture.
One of the more bizarre (and there were many choices) aspects of the inauguration was the creation of a myspace page by the actor Ashton Kutcher expressly for the purpose of making a public pledge to serve the nation in a manner chosen by the individual. He begins the piece by explaining how as a teenager he thought he might join the military, but changed his mind because he "might be commanded to take the life of another." His forthright explanation of his cowardice disguised as pacifism is commendable. One wonders how Bruce Willis, ex-husband of Kutcher's wife Demi Moore would react to hearing this admission. One caution: if you watch the video on the site, be sure you don't have a mouthful of liquid lest you spray the contents all over your computer screen. People with bladder control issues are urged to either void first or else change into a dry adult diaper. Here's an interesting "transcript" from Iowahawk of the video. Read at your own risk.
One of the more bizarre (and there were many choices) aspects of the inauguration was the creation of a myspace page by the actor Ashton Kutcher expressly for the purpose of making a public pledge to serve the nation in a manner chosen by the individual. He begins the piece by explaining how as a teenager he thought he might join the military, but changed his mind because he "might be commanded to take the life of another." His forthright explanation of his cowardice disguised as pacifism is commendable. One wonders how Bruce Willis, ex-husband of Kutcher's wife Demi Moore would react to hearing this admission. One caution: if you watch the video on the site, be sure you don't have a mouthful of liquid lest you spray the contents all over your computer screen. People with bladder control issues are urged to either void first or else change into a dry adult diaper. Here's an interesting "transcript" from Iowahawk of the video. Read at your own risk.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Inauguration Day
The mantle of power has shifted. 43 left the ceremony by helicopter a half hour ahead of schedule, much to the delight of the NY Times live-blogger Katherine Seelye, who reported that the crowd responded with a chant usually heard at sporting events at the conclusion to a one sided contest. No doubt she was only being thorough to include that factoid in her report. 43 has the lowest approval rating since 33 left office in 1953, so the emotion of the crowd was understandable, even if ill-mannered and boorish.
44 attempted to rise above the partisanship of the crowd and the reporters by delivering a long awaited inaugural address that would set a course for his administration. 44 has long been known for his rhetorical and writing skills, along with being a student of history. His sense of developing a motif for his presidency was evident from the moment he chose to announce his candidacy on the steps of the capitol in Springfield, Illinois, continuing through the long campaign until he rode the rails from Philadelphia to Washington DC the weekend before his inauguration.
When it came time to deliver his speech, there was little 16 there, and even less 35. 16's two inaugural speeches were framed by the cataclysm of the Civil War and didn't mention the economy of the country except as it related to the issue of slavery. 35 cast down a gauntlet in front of the Soviet bloc while at the same time offering an olive branch to avert mutual destruction by nuclear war. In spite of the fact that the previous administration had presided over not one, but three recessions, 35 made no mention of economic distress. Whether or not that played a role in the election squeaker that 35 won, I don't know. As James Carville famously said during the campaign of 1990 "It's the economy, stupid."
44 was able to garner the nomination of his party by running against the war in Iraq, a popular stance among the Democrats, if not the entire country. The issue of the war diminished as the campaign progressed as the fruits of "The Surge" finally produced a reduction in sectarian violence and elements of Al-Qaeda were eliminated from Iraq by the Iraqis as well as US troops. The financial crisis that hit the US economy in the middle of the election campaign and effectively sank the hopes of the Republicans, who were guilty by association in the minds of the voting public, was a boon to 44 and delivered the winning margin. Once again Mr. Carville's dictum was proven correct.
The speech was not the best one ever given by 44. There were a couple of dissonances that were hard to digest. In an effort to be inclusive, he mentioned Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus and non-believers--but not Buddhists? How about the Wiccans and Druids? He'll be getting a letter from the Ba'hai anti-defamation league next week. In another paragraph he spliced together all the problems he faces and outlined the steps needed to surmount them. In this, his speech was similar to the first inaugural of 42, albeit with darker war clouds and economic hardship at the core.
He tossed a bone to the netroots who bankrolled his election with contributions concealed by fraudulent credit card identities in two paragraphs: making a veiled reference to the Patriot Act, the detention of terrorists at Guantanamo Bay and the use of waterboarding he declared: "we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." That was all well and good, but wouldn't it have been simpler to state directly his intention to repeal the law and close the base, if those were his intentions? Only if he doesn't plan to do those things. Just as the close of the war in Iraq has removed the urgency of ending it, so also does the fact that the abominations he criticizes were successful in preventing new terror attacks make it safer for him to close Gitmo, while quietly transferring the terrorists to a different facility.
The speech was not a smackdown of the previous administration in a direct sense. Like all good leaders, 44 implied that there had been malpractice afoot, but nothing which was actionable in the present administration. Like the doctor who tells the patient before him that he arrived for treatment at the last possible moment, he offered a chance for cure, even though the illness is grave. He offered a critique of capitalism and the harshness of its down cycles, much as 32 did in his first inaugural address, chastising the moneychangers for their "stubbornness" and "incompetence." 44 departs from 32's script in ignoring rural/agricultural America in favor of lumping a host of problems together that he plans to solve.
The speech sounds different from the way it reads, given 44's considerable skill as an orator, at least when he has a teleprompter in front of him. Contrast that with the nail screeching reading of the inaugural poem. It was as forgettable as it was awful. Enough said.
What can one say about a nation of reporters who have collectively willed one man into office and then pretend to write objectively about him? Only that they fell over each other trying to pile superlatives higher than the once mighty World Trade Center Twin Towers, and then at the end of each piece cautioned the viewer or reader not to have too many great expectations after all. It was a day of firsts, none the least being the complete surrender of the press to the will of a politician. A fawning K. Couric interviewed 44 and the toughest question she could ask was how his smoking cessation was going. His non-response to her nagging answered the question and she failed to call him out for being evasive. This, I'm afraid, is what will pass for journalism in the next eight years. I say eight years with confidence because the only way 44 can fail to be re-elected is to be found in bed with an underage boy. Barring that, this blog will continue for another 1461 days.
44 attempted to rise above the partisanship of the crowd and the reporters by delivering a long awaited inaugural address that would set a course for his administration. 44 has long been known for his rhetorical and writing skills, along with being a student of history. His sense of developing a motif for his presidency was evident from the moment he chose to announce his candidacy on the steps of the capitol in Springfield, Illinois, continuing through the long campaign until he rode the rails from Philadelphia to Washington DC the weekend before his inauguration.
When it came time to deliver his speech, there was little 16 there, and even less 35. 16's two inaugural speeches were framed by the cataclysm of the Civil War and didn't mention the economy of the country except as it related to the issue of slavery. 35 cast down a gauntlet in front of the Soviet bloc while at the same time offering an olive branch to avert mutual destruction by nuclear war. In spite of the fact that the previous administration had presided over not one, but three recessions, 35 made no mention of economic distress. Whether or not that played a role in the election squeaker that 35 won, I don't know. As James Carville famously said during the campaign of 1990 "It's the economy, stupid."
44 was able to garner the nomination of his party by running against the war in Iraq, a popular stance among the Democrats, if not the entire country. The issue of the war diminished as the campaign progressed as the fruits of "The Surge" finally produced a reduction in sectarian violence and elements of Al-Qaeda were eliminated from Iraq by the Iraqis as well as US troops. The financial crisis that hit the US economy in the middle of the election campaign and effectively sank the hopes of the Republicans, who were guilty by association in the minds of the voting public, was a boon to 44 and delivered the winning margin. Once again Mr. Carville's dictum was proven correct.
The speech was not the best one ever given by 44. There were a couple of dissonances that were hard to digest. In an effort to be inclusive, he mentioned Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus and non-believers--but not Buddhists? How about the Wiccans and Druids? He'll be getting a letter from the Ba'hai anti-defamation league next week. In another paragraph he spliced together all the problems he faces and outlined the steps needed to surmount them. In this, his speech was similar to the first inaugural of 42, albeit with darker war clouds and economic hardship at the core.
He tossed a bone to the netroots who bankrolled his election with contributions concealed by fraudulent credit card identities in two paragraphs: making a veiled reference to the Patriot Act, the detention of terrorists at Guantanamo Bay and the use of waterboarding he declared: "we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." That was all well and good, but wouldn't it have been simpler to state directly his intention to repeal the law and close the base, if those were his intentions? Only if he doesn't plan to do those things. Just as the close of the war in Iraq has removed the urgency of ending it, so also does the fact that the abominations he criticizes were successful in preventing new terror attacks make it safer for him to close Gitmo, while quietly transferring the terrorists to a different facility.
The speech was not a smackdown of the previous administration in a direct sense. Like all good leaders, 44 implied that there had been malpractice afoot, but nothing which was actionable in the present administration. Like the doctor who tells the patient before him that he arrived for treatment at the last possible moment, he offered a chance for cure, even though the illness is grave. He offered a critique of capitalism and the harshness of its down cycles, much as 32 did in his first inaugural address, chastising the moneychangers for their "stubbornness" and "incompetence." 44 departs from 32's script in ignoring rural/agricultural America in favor of lumping a host of problems together that he plans to solve.
The speech sounds different from the way it reads, given 44's considerable skill as an orator, at least when he has a teleprompter in front of him. Contrast that with the nail screeching reading of the inaugural poem. It was as forgettable as it was awful. Enough said.
What can one say about a nation of reporters who have collectively willed one man into office and then pretend to write objectively about him? Only that they fell over each other trying to pile superlatives higher than the once mighty World Trade Center Twin Towers, and then at the end of each piece cautioned the viewer or reader not to have too many great expectations after all. It was a day of firsts, none the least being the complete surrender of the press to the will of a politician. A fawning K. Couric interviewed 44 and the toughest question she could ask was how his smoking cessation was going. His non-response to her nagging answered the question and she failed to call him out for being evasive. This, I'm afraid, is what will pass for journalism in the next eight years. I say eight years with confidence because the only way 44 can fail to be re-elected is to be found in bed with an underage boy. Barring that, this blog will continue for another 1461 days.
Monday, January 19, 2009
Prologue II
It was another day of celebration in the capital city, chronicled by CNN and others. The air was less frigid than the day before and celebrants on the mall provided enthusiastic interviews to Anderson Cooper, who served as a roving reporter while his colleagues remained glued to their director's chairs elsewhere. Among those, Wolf Blitzer and Soledad O'Brien vied for the honor of who could deliver the most glowing and optimistic forecast for the coming administration. To be sure, Ms. O'Brien was careful to remind the audience that progress in America would continue to be a non-linear phenomenon, and in all liklihood it was going to take years to reverse the problems [created by 43 and his party].
Don't just take my word for it. Over at Powerline they have had their ears on the rail, listening for the noise of the media train rumbling into the city here.
All the while, 44 and an entourage of well wishers listened to a concert in front of the Lincoln Memorial. The artists were from all musical brands: Garth Brooks, Sheryl Crow, Bruce Springsteen and Bon Jovi were listed as participating. Unfortunately, the performance was being taped by HBO for viewing later by subscribers to their premium channel and not audible to the masses glued to the CNN feed. Wolf Blitzer on several occasions pointed this out in his most apologetic voice. Apparently change comes slowly to the world when it comes to making profits in the music and entertainment industry.
Don't just take my word for it. Over at Powerline they have had their ears on the rail, listening for the noise of the media train rumbling into the city here.
All the while, 44 and an entourage of well wishers listened to a concert in front of the Lincoln Memorial. The artists were from all musical brands: Garth Brooks, Sheryl Crow, Bruce Springsteen and Bon Jovi were listed as participating. Unfortunately, the performance was being taped by HBO for viewing later by subscribers to their premium channel and not audible to the masses glued to the CNN feed. Wolf Blitzer on several occasions pointed this out in his most apologetic voice. Apparently change comes slowly to the world when it comes to making profits in the music and entertainment industry.
Sunday, January 18, 2009
Prologue
43 has been driven from the White House and is spending the weekend at the Camp David retreat before returning to Texas where he will spend the balance of days in obscurity, except when a reporter feels the urge to explain the shortcomings of 44's administration by pointing out just how terrible things were in the previous eight years. Beyond that, he will be permitted to work on his memoirs, ride his mountain bike and clear brush on his ranch.
The "historic" arrival of 44 in Washington occurred yesterday by special Amtrak train, taking eight hours to traverse the distance from Philidelphia to Washington. That is slower than Lance Armstrong could do with the Tour de France peleton, but not bad for a pubicly subsidized train. The entire event was covered by an intrepid CNN crew, seated outside in the freezing cold while the fortunate media types invited to ride the train were comfortably munching snacks and feeling good about the whole affair. Poor David Gergen, the token conservative on the panel, was sniffing every five seconds from an upper respiratory infection. No one offered him a facial tissue during the time I watched. The other panel members were Wolf Blitzer, Anderson Cooper, Soledad O'Brien and Donna Brazille. Ms. Brazille is a current DNC bigwig and former Clinton operative. Her adversarial pedigree perhaps excuses her absolute failure to demonstrate an attitude remotely objective when it comes to the adminstration of President 44. What I couldn't figure out was why that exuberance caused her to abandon any shreds of common sense when it came to fantasizing about some of the activities to be undertaken by 44. She opined that he would take the opportunity to mingle with the citizenry of Washington in coming months, perhaps meandering over to a nearby farmers' market to buy green peppers from the vendors. She described Washington in such glowing terms that for a moment I forgot that its 2007 murder rate of 31/100,000 residents was fifth from the top of large US cities. I suspect the Secret Service might have an different opinion from Ms. Brazille regarding the wisdom of 44 walking the streets of Washington without a contingent of well-armed guards. Recall that in 1981, a deranged young man named John Hinckley was able to seriously wound President 40 and several others in front of a hotel in Washington. Despite having one of the most stringent gun control laws in the nation (although recently overturned) Washington is still a very dangerous city.
The tenor of the conversation in the group resonated with the general feelings extant in the press at large that the new administration will, just by being there, transform many of the challenges faced by the United States. Granted, a good leader can, by charismatic appeal alone, change the behavior of the citizenry and motivate them to perform at levels unobtainable by a less skilled leader. The great appeal of a leader like President 40 has been attributed to this principle. On the other hand, if the policies of a leader result in poor outcomes for a majority of the citizenry, no amount of charisma can sustain his position of influence and maintain high popularity levels. 44 begins his term with a high popularity rating in all polls conducted. One would expect that the pundits and publishers who supported his candidacy from the beginning will attempt to excuse failures on the basis of the previous administration's incompetence. Certainly those in attendance at the rooftop colliquy were of that mind. Ms. Brazille, the most highly partisan of them, can be expected to maintain her allegiance despite any evidence to the contrary. As for the rest of them, since the role of the mass media has evolved into one that amplifies any and all missteps by those in power, they will have no choice in the coming years but to climb out of the tank where they have resided as forecasters of the arrival of the chosen one, and begin to take him apart, piece by piece, until what remains will be fertilizer for historians.
The "historic" arrival of 44 in Washington occurred yesterday by special Amtrak train, taking eight hours to traverse the distance from Philidelphia to Washington. That is slower than Lance Armstrong could do with the Tour de France peleton, but not bad for a pubicly subsidized train. The entire event was covered by an intrepid CNN crew, seated outside in the freezing cold while the fortunate media types invited to ride the train were comfortably munching snacks and feeling good about the whole affair. Poor David Gergen, the token conservative on the panel, was sniffing every five seconds from an upper respiratory infection. No one offered him a facial tissue during the time I watched. The other panel members were Wolf Blitzer, Anderson Cooper, Soledad O'Brien and Donna Brazille. Ms. Brazille is a current DNC bigwig and former Clinton operative. Her adversarial pedigree perhaps excuses her absolute failure to demonstrate an attitude remotely objective when it comes to the adminstration of President 44. What I couldn't figure out was why that exuberance caused her to abandon any shreds of common sense when it came to fantasizing about some of the activities to be undertaken by 44. She opined that he would take the opportunity to mingle with the citizenry of Washington in coming months, perhaps meandering over to a nearby farmers' market to buy green peppers from the vendors. She described Washington in such glowing terms that for a moment I forgot that its 2007 murder rate of 31/100,000 residents was fifth from the top of large US cities. I suspect the Secret Service might have an different opinion from Ms. Brazille regarding the wisdom of 44 walking the streets of Washington without a contingent of well-armed guards. Recall that in 1981, a deranged young man named John Hinckley was able to seriously wound President 40 and several others in front of a hotel in Washington. Despite having one of the most stringent gun control laws in the nation (although recently overturned) Washington is still a very dangerous city.
The tenor of the conversation in the group resonated with the general feelings extant in the press at large that the new administration will, just by being there, transform many of the challenges faced by the United States. Granted, a good leader can, by charismatic appeal alone, change the behavior of the citizenry and motivate them to perform at levels unobtainable by a less skilled leader. The great appeal of a leader like President 40 has been attributed to this principle. On the other hand, if the policies of a leader result in poor outcomes for a majority of the citizenry, no amount of charisma can sustain his position of influence and maintain high popularity levels. 44 begins his term with a high popularity rating in all polls conducted. One would expect that the pundits and publishers who supported his candidacy from the beginning will attempt to excuse failures on the basis of the previous administration's incompetence. Certainly those in attendance at the rooftop colliquy were of that mind. Ms. Brazille, the most highly partisan of them, can be expected to maintain her allegiance despite any evidence to the contrary. As for the rest of them, since the role of the mass media has evolved into one that amplifies any and all missteps by those in power, they will have no choice in the coming years but to climb out of the tank where they have resided as forecasters of the arrival of the chosen one, and begin to take him apart, piece by piece, until what remains will be fertilizer for historians.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
