CHANGE We Can Believe In?

iUniverse, Inc.

Contents

Introduction........................................................xviiThe Character of Obama's Presidency.................................1Resetting Cold War Relationships....................................53Globalization: One Step Forward, Two Steps Back.....................63The Politics and Business of Religion...............................91Social and Cultural Potpourri.......................................101Glorified Misbehavior of Celebrities................................125Sports: Lots to Cheer, More to Jeer.................................139Meanwhile, Around the World.........................................177Deaths of Famous People.............................................337Acknowledgment......................................................357Bibliography: Notes on Source Materials.............................359Index...............................................................361About the Author....................................................367

Chapter One

In Which His Dating Habits and Nobel Peace Prize Incite Almost as Much Controversy as His New War Strategy and Plan to Reform Health Care

Familiarity Breeding Contempt

New York Post Heralds Obama with Racist Cartoon

I have been an ardent critic of the black-victimology politics that Reverends Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have turned into a very profitable business. But even these firebrands occasionally stumble upon a racial slight that warrants public outrage and protest.

Such is the case with the cartoon the New York Post published on Wednesday, which depicts two white cops shooting a chimpanzee under the caption, "They'll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill." For not even a card-carrying member of the KKK can deny the patently racist (black-man-as-ape) stereotype it reinforces.

Ridiculing the first black president of the United States in this fashion is not only insulting but also dangerous. After all, if the Post indicates that it's okay to laugh about assassinating President Obama because of his economic stimulus plan, some kook might think it's okay to assassinate him because of his health-care plan, which some right-wingnuts have damned as a treasonous, socialist manifesto. God knows JFK, RFK, and MLK were all taken out for much less.

It was meant to mock an ineptly written federal stimulus bill. Period. But it has been taken as something else-as a depiction of President Obama, as a thinly veiled expression of racism. This most certainly was not its intent; to those who were offended by the image, we apologize.

Meanwhile, this indignant "apology," which presumably was offered today to those (hyper-sensitive blacks and guilt-ridden whites) who didn't get the joke, is sufficient provocation for Sharpton & Co. to picket the Post until kingdom come. There would be a far greater impact on its bottom line, however, if the black professional athletes on whom this newspaper relies to generate interest in its sports pages were to boycott it.

February 21

UPDATE

Murdoch Apologizes

In an extraordinarily conciliatory move (financial motives notwithstanding), Rupert Murdoch personally apologized today for the publication of this offensive cartoon:

As the chairman of the New York Post, I am ultimately responsible for what is printed in its pages. The buck stops with me. Last week, we made a mistake. We ran a cartoon that offended many people. Today I want to personally apologize to any reader who felt offended, and even insulted ... We all hold the readers of the New York Post in high regard and I promise you that we will seek to be more attuned to the sensitivities of our community. That's better. Enough said.

February 24

From HOPE to DOOM in One Month

One of the more ironic features of Obama's nascent presidency is the way he's being criticized for not inspiring enough hope that the United States will weather this worsening financial crisis. And it does not matter to his critics that Obama is merely honoring his promise to speak truth to the American people about the state of the Union, which in fact is in pretty dire straits. Even former President Bill Clinton has joined the chorus of those insisting that Obama's doom-and-gloom truth-telling is only making matters worse.

It is not lost on me, however, that these are the same folks who criticized former president George W. Bush for spinning rosy scenarios about the war in Iraq, when it was clear that it too was in dire straits. Frankly, I think Obama has struck the right balance between informing the American people about the serious nature of this crisis and explaining the initiatives he's undertaking to deal with it. And this is precisely what I expect him to do in his first address before a joint session of Congress tonight.

For the record, despite what his critics say, Obama actually has been reassuring the nation that financial recovery will come ... someday. And he will undoubtedly provide further reassurances in his address. But just imagine the deluge of criticism that would be raining down on him (about being nave and too full of hope) if he did not make it painfully clear that the road ahead will be rough.

In any event, it is plainly absurd to blame Obama for the fact that investor confidence on Wall Street is so fickle these days that any idle-minded rumor can cause the market to plummet five hundred points in an instant. But the fact that the Dow closed yesterday at its lowest point in over a decade will only embolden his critics. Yet Clinton of all people should know that Obama's performance should be based more on how many jobs he creates on Main Street than on how much wealth speculators create on Wall Street.

Nevertheless, here's proof that criticisms of him in this context are wholly unwarranted:

If we do not move swiftly to sign the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act into law, an economy that is in crisis will be faced with catastrophe. I know that people are hurting. I've heard their stories, and I've sensed their deep frustration. But I also know that these struggles have not diminished the strength and decency of the American people ... We can write that next great chapter in American history. If we stay focused on the big picture; if we never forget the people who we are fighting for; if we represent the strength and dignity of the American people, then I know we can answer's history's call and renew America's promise. (Obama addressing the House Democratic Caucus, whitehouse.gov, February 5, 2009)

So what more do these Pollyannas want from this honest, responsible, and intelligent president?! They seem utterly oblivious to the fact that it took Bush eight years to create this mess. Surely Obama should be given at least eight months to clean it up....

Meanwhile, this financial crisis is bound to hasten the demise of America as the world's sole economic superpower ... But am I the only one who finds it fateful that clueless (white) folks in Washington and on Wall Street are doing all they can to turn this country into a bankrupt banana republic just as voters are poised to elect the first black president of the United States ...? ("Nut-job Republicans defeat bailout bill," The iPINIONS Journal, October 1, 2008) February 24

Now Cheerleader in Chief?

The impact of this recession is real, and it is everywhere. But while our economy may be weakened and our confidence shaken; though we are living through difficult and uncertain times, tonight I want every American to know this: We will rebuild, we will recover, and the United States of America will emerge stronger than before ... The fact is, our economy did not fall into decline overnight. Nor did all of our problems begin when the housing market collapsed or the stock market sank ... In other words, we have lived through an era where too often, short-term gains were prized over long-term prosperity; where we failed to look beyond the next payment, the next quarter, or the next election ... Well that day of reckoning has arrived, and the time to take charge of our future is here. (New York Times, February 24, 2009)

This is an excerpt from the address to a joint session of Congress that President Obama delivered last night. It was both comprehensive and inspiring, which makes critics of his political rhetoric seem like delusional and begrudging naysayers. I just hope Obama knows there's no pleasing these folks.

But enough about his substance; I have a beef about his style. Specifically, I find it extremely irritating that Obama can never leave a room gracefully. Why does he have to shake so many hands-as if he were working the line at a campaign rally?! This was a joint session of Congress for Christ's sake! Even so, there he was, still in the Chamber, reaching ten deep to shake hands with Joe Politician-even after every other dignitary, including Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, had already left. Frankly, someone should inform him that to preserve what little remains of the aura and mystique of the presidency he should always be the last to enter a room and the first to leave.

Also, First Lady Michelle Obama is obviously proud of her toned arms, and rightly so. But I do not think this was the occasion to show them off by wearing sleeveless attire more suitable for a cocktail party.

February 25

All Obama All the Time

Researchers have determined that President Obama has made more media appearances at this point in his presidency than any of his predecessors. This makes one wonder if he's doing more to compete with the likes of the Octomom for media coverage than to fix the ailing U.S. economy.

Obviously, with Obama writing newspaper editorials, publishing podcasts, conducting town hall meetings, doing late-night talk shows, and appearing on enough magazine covers to make supermodels green with envy, we did not need media researchers to tell us that he risks being overexposed. But I have no doubt that if Obama were hiding out in the Oval Office the way George W. Bush did during periods of crisis, his critics would be lampooning him as the "invisible man."

Could he have made fewer appearances? I think so. For example, he did not have to command airtime to announce every Cabinet nomination; especially since, with the possible exception of the State and Justice, most Americans couldn't care any less who heads these various departments.

In his defense, however, Obama has clearly made the very reasonable political calculation that the more he acts like the explainer-in-chief, the more confidence he will inspire in his plan for economic recovery and reinvestment. And given the complex and unprecedented nature of the global financial crisis we're facing, this seems a very sensible calculation. Not to mention poll numbers, which indicate that the American people just can't get enough of him ...

Accordingly, I'm sure the press conference he held last night furthered this keep-the-people-informed-and-reassured political strategy; notwithstanding that his answers to questions about corporate bailouts and bonuses have become so familiar that a few of us can recite them almost verbatim.

All the same, one exciting moment came when CNN reporter Ed Henry posited that New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo was doing a better job of extracting concessions from the bonus hogs at AIG than the White House. And, frankly, Henry was making a salient point and seemed to have Obama back on his heels. But then he followed up by effectively badgering the president to explain why, when everyone else vented outrage immediately, it took him several days to voice his anger. This prompted the "I'll bend but not break" Obama to respond with icy indignation as follows:

It took a couple of days because I like to know what I'm talking about before I speak.

(National Public Radio, March 24, 2009)

Ouch!

Incidentally, this was the second prime-time press conference Obama has given during his short, sixty-four-day presidency. By comparison, both Bush and Clinton gave only four such press conferences during their respective eight-year presidencies. But if Obama's mug is this ubiquitous in the fall, I too shall hold him in contempt.

March 25

Obama's Bowing Stirs Controversy

Whispers of disillusionment with President Obama among left-wing pundits are growing louder every day. Their disillusionment stems from the fact that he's proving to be far more pragmatic than ideological as president.

For example, these pundits-who take credit for getting him elected-lament that Obama has failed to appoint a fresh and diverse Cabinet (there are too many Clinton administration has-beens and too many white businessmen); has failed to make his government initiatives transparent (not a single bill has been published in advance for public scrutiny); and has failed to discontinue many of the war-on-terror tactics Bush deployed (the United States is still renditioning and torturing suspects despite his protestations to the contrary)-just to name a few of his unkept promises.

But I find their whining impatient and nave. For on all matters of substance, especially those related to the economy and national security, Obama has demonstrated an encouraging willingness to sacrifice political ideology for the sake of good policy. As a case in point, it makes sense that he has continued the war-on-terror tactics that have kept the country safe for over seven years.

This is not to say, however, that I see no cause for complaint. It's just that, at this point in his presidency, my disillusionment stems mostly from matters of style. For example, I lament that he invited Scarlett O'Hara wannabes to march in his inaugural parade; that he lulls about after official gatherings, shaking hands as if he were still on the campaign trail; and that he gratuitously dissed the British prime minister, Gordon Brown, during his recent visit to the White House.

It is in this context that I feel constrained to comment on the kerfuffle now brewing about the way Obama greeted Saudi king Abdullah at last week's G-20 summit in London. On April 7, 2009, the conservative-leaning Washington Times accused Obama of a "shocking display of fealty to a foreign potentate" by bowing to Abdullah. This inspired an overzealous presidential aide to defend him by insisting that:

It wasn't a bow ... [the president] bent over and grasped his hands with both hands ... he's taller than King Abdullah. (Politico, April 8, 2009)

But, as disappointed as I am with the Washington Times and other critics for making this patently absurd charge, I am even more disappointed with Obama's handlers for putting this Clintonian spin on such an obvious gesture of respect. He clearly bowed, which according to Saudi custom, was the polite thing to do. Besides, if this were nothing more than an accommodation for differences in height, how do they explain Obama's failure to do the same when he greeted the (even shorter) queen? Do they not see how this inconsistency is such that it will only feed idle speculation about Obama's affinity for, if not devotion to, Islam-as opposed to his professed Christian faith?

Ironically, his handlers would have made Obama even more endearing (at home and abroad) if they had simply chalked up giving Her Majesty only a slight tilt of the head, while giving the king a full bend at the waist, to an innocent commoner's mistake. And nothing reinforces his enviable common touch quite like the way he shook hands with the guard outside 10 Downing Street-much to the discreet delight of the guard and obvious consternation of PM Gordon Brown.

I appreciate, of course, that some consider his bow a national humiliation because the founding principles of the United States supposedly make it anathema for any president to bow down before royalty (or any foreign leader). This is why no U.S. president has ever done anything more than give a respectful tilt of the head to the Japanese emperor, for whom it would have been clearly "politically correct" to bow even lower than Obama did before the Saudi king.

Therefore, it is troubling that the geniuses in the White House decided to deal with this controversy by making Obama seem as congenitally averse to admitting a mistake as George W. Bush. Never mind what it portends for his presidency that his advisers are so inclined not just to buy into this lie about his bow, but to disseminate it unabashedly.

Ultimately, though, one has to wonder why Obama is allowing them to undermine the credibility of his presidency in this way. For he has to know that it's only a matter of time before a member of the press corps poses the question: Mr. President, did you bend or did you bow? Unfortunately, the Catch-22 now is such that, if he concedes the obvious, he makes his handlers look like dissembling hacks; if he perpetuates this lie, he makes Bill Clinton look like a Boy Scout.

What a silly, amateurish mess!

April 10

UPDATE

Bowing Down to the Japanese Emperor

It is a sad reflection on the current state of the news media that idle gossip and silly punditry now flow unfiltered from the fringe corners of the blogosphere into the mainstream-often as breaking news! And nothing demonstrates this quite like the way conservative wingnuts turned their paranoid delusions about Obama 's birthplace (they say Kenya) and religion (they say Muslim) into national headlines.

(Continues...)

Excerpted from CHANGE We Can Believe In?by Anthony Livingston Hall Copyright © 2010 by Anthony Livingston Hall. Excerpted by permission.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.