Saturday, June 19, 2010

Obama's Disposition

New York Times Visual Editor and Op Ed contributor Charles Blow has an interesting Op Ed on the waning popularity of Obama: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/19/opinion/19blow.html?pagewanted=print. The love affair, of course, didn't last long and one could argue the media contributed to the quick fall by holding him to impossible standards. The right then pounced and anti-government sentiment was stirred, even as we arguably need the government like never before. Even when Obama cajoled BP to set up an unprecedented $20 billion account for damages, he is still critiqued. The main focus of that critique is his stoic nature and ability to control, or at least conceal, his deeper emotions. In most countries, this would be celebrated. Here a President has to be both leveled and show the pain of the average person. It is a relatively cynical statement on American politics, given that one could quite convincingly argue that Bush didn't really care about the average American while Obama advocated for them for years in Chicago, but the press gives Bush the pass because he often wore his emotions on his sleeves.

The real irony, I believe, is the media's failure to report that Obama has been largely successful in getting very contentious legistlation passed, from the recovery bill (that was not enough from many liberals) to healthcare reform to smaller successes on the environment, labor rights and changing global attitudes toward America. In fact, a website PoliFact.com, as reported by Blow, reports that of the 168 promises Obama made where actions have been completed, he only broke 19. Compare that to the record of Bush, or Clinton for that matter. Remember GW's promise of bipartisanship! And yet the media, including Blow, believe that the major problem with Obama is that he must change and show his emotions. I think he needs to gain more resolve to take on the party of no and complete his work, though he must address his cosmetic relationship with America to save us from another conservative revolution led from an even more radical right.

No comments: