Most politicians know that any sense of private life is sacrificed when elected to office. When it comes to being the President of the United States, you are going to be followed and chronicled wherever you go, period. However, when was that last time you remember seeing the current president in the tabloids so often? And no... Bill Clinton doesn't count.
The fact that more people look to the man as more of a celebrity instead of an actual leader doesn't exactly inspire.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
Your reason doesn't actually involve Obama in any way - just peoples' perception of him.
Yes, but one reason not to like him is because he's just riding on his sensationalism. People are already treating him like a god and he hasn't even done anything.
If all the media can report on is his legendary journey four months after his election, the president is doing something wrong.
Let him do things then judge him based on his actions, not the actions of those who thing he's Jesus 2.0.
And the media has reported on far more than his "legendary journey". I see stories every week about some change he's made.
Anonymous, I totally agree. It doesn't involve him or his actions. I don't take it as a good sign that I continue to see more sensationalism about him and his family than I do in regards to his actual accomplishments. Last time I went grocery shopping, he and/or Michelle were on no less than 9 tabloids and magazines.
I get that he's a dynamic figure, I really do. But being the President is about more than just being in the spotlight. And what I have seen hasn't impressed me all that much, whether its his ridiculous dependence on teleprompters for absolutely everything, to the whole "I'm going to allow embryonic stem-cells but then sign the order banning them 2 days later" routine, and the list goes on.
Too many people are satisfied with Obama's popularism. Given the mess that the American economy is in, I think they deserve more than that.
Anonymous - What changes he's made? Cause I'm telling you, I am the media and all I see is a whole lot of sensationalism. And as for basing him on his actions, I've yet to see one that's judge-able.
If you have the expectation that the long-term (or even short-term) results of his presidency should already be apparent, then you have fallen victim to the same sensationalism that Jason is criticising. We haven't even fully seen the long-term results of the Bush administration in their entirety, let alone the results of anything Obama has done in the less than two months since he took office.
Do note that I'm not defending the man in any way. I'm simply stating what I believe to be obvious...at least obvious to anybody who doesn't have an agenda against him.
BTW, I like the arrogance behind the "I am the media" comment. Yeah, sure. You are the voice of the entire world, are you?
Anon,
You bring up good points. There are a few inherent challenges to critiquing the success of a political agenda. First, the timing is never fast enough to satisfy most supporters and critics alike. Second, the long-term effects of these decisions are almost impossible to accurately judge.
The whole point I was trying to make with this whole post is what has been pointed out already: that far too many people are caught up in that rampant media sensationalism. The problem that I have with how it pertains to Mr. Obama is that he doesn't seem to be all that eager to rid himself of the overly simplified "I am change" moniker. It's one thing to have confidence in your message. However, when that comes at the expense of a healthy dose of much needed reality, you have to ask yourself if American society got what they were hoping for.
I would love to see the President do well, even if at the very least it's because the world needs more examples of stability. What we see though is more of the same thing. Democrat or Republican, Liberal or Conservative, the behemoth of a bureaucracy trudges forward regardless of who's steering.
I'm not sure how Obama would go about ridding himself of the "I am change" moniker. Should he address the nation and declare that he is, in fact, truly against change and that it was all a ruse? This is one of those "actions speak louder than words" situations. While he hasn't been President long, his actions so far do seem to suggest that he is pursuing change to some degree.
We've seen him do things like signing orders to close Guantanamo Bay, reversing bans on funding abortion clinics as well as changing government disclosure policies to encourage openness. While the need for, and the likely effectiveness of, these changes can be debated, it's clear that, for better or for worse, he's trying to change things.
While not everybody will agree with the direction he's taking things, he's made more attempts at change in the past two months than Bush did in the last eight years (or Clinton in the eight years before that).
I reserve my judgement for a later date, when he's had a chance to demonstrate, one way or the other, if it was simply rhetoric or not.
I think we agree more than we realize. From what I read, there are a growing number in his inner circle that are telling him to slow down and focus on a few key areas instead of trying to completely rework the entire administration. Some of my friends (and his supporters) agree and say he needs to take it easy.
Love or hate the Tories, Harper's strategy of identifying 5 key priorities really struck a chord with people. It's very easy to go back and see that yes the GST did drop, etc. Obama is likely working exceptionally hard to show that he's different, but his efforts are spread too thin over too many initiatives. With that happening, noticeable change is minimal and much more difficult to notice.
I've often heard it said that in countries like Canada and the United States it can take years to see any significant change between different administrations simply because the bureaucracies that implement the policies are just so huge. Final judgement on Obama should be reserved for a later date. For many people (supporters and critics), it means that it's time to settle down and focus a bit more on the basics.
Obama might not be able to fix the economy overnight, but I think he should make more of an effort to outline smaller, practical steps to achieve his goals instead of relying on the all-encompassing 'hope and change' that he has come to embody.
Jason, at no point did I necessarily disagree with you :) Sometimes I just like to be difficult.
I agree with the 5 priorities thing. It could be viewed as a negative thing - people have short attention spans, so they forget about exhaustive lists - but it certainly makes a good marketing tool. Come to think of it, during his campaign Obama made use of that style frequently - constant, vague references to change without giving a ton of specifics that could bore the always fickle electorate.
I decided I should make an account. As fun as being anonymous is, those moments where you're arguing with a duplicate of yourself don't sit well with me.
Hai Jason!
Wie geht's? :)
Ah... I've been wondering where I could get a dose of that trademark Deutsch? Was machst du?
Post a Comment