A recent Gallup poll reveals that in every state in the country, from the bluest of the blue to the reddest of the red, the majority of the population identify themselves as conservative. If this is the case, how did we elect the most far left President in the history of the country and award him control of both the Senate and Congress?
Certainly there were a multitude of things in play in the 2008 election. The electorate was exhausted with eight years of President Bush, and the war “of election” that the Democrats had wrapped around his neck. Then there was Bush’s historic spending and the double digit growth of government during his administration. If this were not enough, the Conservatives were also saddled with a poor candidate who was viewed as more of a liberal than a true conservative. The real breaking point came a mere two months before the election with the meltdown of Wall Street and the accompanying collapse of the American economy. (There could be volumes written on how all of these events “coincidentally” came together to form the perfect storm, but that is a subject for another time.)
Then, an appealing young community organizer, with a radical background in his past, gave a keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. The rest, so they say, is history.
Still, how could such an inexperienced individual with such a radical past, and few real accomplishments under his belt, be elected to the highest office in the land?
It was the mass media, stupid.
The mass media played an historic and unprecedented role in both taking down Bush and hoisting up Obama. The fact that they played this role cannot be contested. For eight years they ate at the trough of Democratic talking points, and crafted their reporting along dictated story lines. The media can be biased in so many ways, from the overt, tingly legged networks, to simply deciding what news will be reported and what will not.
Let’s focus in on just one, but one very critical aspect of the mass media’s reporting of Obama’s leadership versus President Bush’s leadership.
Remember the Bush leadership story line? Bush was dumb (aren’t all Republicans) and did not have the faculties to lead this country. Let’s face it; he had a hard time stringing eight words together to form a sentence. So, perforce, he was an idiot. We all know by now that it was the evil Vice President Cheney who was acting as shadow President. It was Cheney who was pulling all of the strings and making all of the decision.
Contrast this with the new Obama story line. Cool, smart (the highest IQ of any past president), introspective, decisive, charismatic, and a rock star quality, are just some of the fawning descriptions that we are continually fed. He also has one, big, self described gift; the ability to give one hell of a speech by reading someone else’s words off of a teleprompter. This, perforce, makes him a genius.
Does this media induced view measure up with reality? Is there any evidence of a decision that Obama has personally made? Certainly there are decisions being made at a rapid pace, but they seem to have been outsourced to a cast of thousands.
All presidents come into office with a legislative agenda. In the past, legislation was crafted in the White House and then sent to Congress for the legislative process. With President Obama, the three major bills of his presidency thus far, the one trillion dollar bail-out, Cap and Trade, and Healthcare reform, were punted to Congress with no preconditions.
All presidents in the past have had a Cabinet composed of the Secretaries of the major federal agencies. Although there is no prescribed frequency of cabinet meetings, past presidents have had cabinet meetings on the average of once a week. After a photo op first meeting in April, Obama has had just one meeting since! Why? He has outsourced decision making to his largely unconfirmed “Czar’s”, over thirty by last count. This should be a big news story in and of itself, but you would have to dig to get this fact.
Above all things, the President is The Commander-In-Chief, yet there now comes evidence that he is outsourcing the Afghanistan decision to Vice President Biden. After all, it was Biden’s foreign affairs expertise that placed him on the ticket. (Before last week, President Obama had talked with General McCrystal only once since he appointed him. President Bush, on the other hand, would conference with his generals on at least a weekly basis.)
Meanwhile, while Biden ponders and the President goes on another date night with Michelle, ten more American troops have been killed in Afghanistan over this past weekend.
If the above facts were describing President Bush, what do you think the mass media’s story line would be? The mass media that bears a large responsibility for getting President Obama elected is now doubling down on their guy. Rush Limbaugh has described it best as the “state run media”.
This President is a decisive leader? He is little more than a talking head and his presidency no more than “Barry and Michelle’s Excellent Adventure”.
The buck does not stop at President Obama’s desk. Where it does stop will be the story of the century if someone should ever decide to investigate it.
Popularity: 51% [?]
