Barack Obama. - OG Myth-Weavers

Notices


Worldly Talk

Civil discussion and debate on real world events and issues.


Barack Obama.

 
Barack Obama.

Let's get a few facts out of the way first.

1) He's a politician.

That's about all that needs saying. He's going to be biased, naturally. Objectively? Ever since I started following the elections and his career, I actually feel sorry for the guy. I mean, past presidents had it bad too. That position is never an easy one. It is always scrutinized and it is often easy to criticize.

But do you think, compared to his predecessors, that Obama is more or less a bigger target because of the presence of rampant media? How much of an impact do you think social networking has had on the campaign? Can you cite examples of groups or perhaps activists that used twitter/facebook/blogger?

As far as I'm aware, B.Obama is the first American president to answer questions online. He said he wished for more transparency on behalf of the administration. And, in truth, I do hear more about the US now than when G.Bush was up there in the White House. Do you think that this new transparency is actually the president's doing, or is it a side effect caused by the emergence of social networking giants Twitter&Facebook? (And they just rolled with it)

Do you think this added transparency has caused more harm than good for B.O.'s presidency?

I am of the opinion that ignorance is bliss and Obama's dropping popularity is, mostly, caused by the free (And sometimes superfluous/gratuitous) flow of information.

Opinions?

Well, Obama has had it rough. I think the whole information revolution has helped and hurt him. It's how he raised such a massive amount of money for his election campaign. If Obama had wanted to he could have kept things from getting as transparent as they are now, that was his own choice. Obama's popularity rating is inevitable I think. Obama has been playing the centrist every since he's been elected and this hurts him to a degree because he is stepping on the toes of a lot of progressives that helped him get there in the first place, it's part of the reason so many progressives are either furious with Obama or have no energy to care at the moment.

Obama also chose one of the worst times to be a US President. He inherited the financial crisis which already had him at a disadvantage, his financial advisors told him he would have to spend in order to keep the economy from imploding so he did earning the ire of about half of the country. He made a lot of promises which he has kept to some degree. He passed healthcare reform, something that people seem to forget but was unprecedented as dems have been trying to do that for decades now. He also got Wall Street reform passed but none of this will work for him until he starts getting the job train moving. As long as people are at home without jobs they're going to be looking for someone to blame and Obama is a big red target right now, his numbers are still good in comparison to other Presidents during this point in their presidency so we'll see what happens. If he can get progressives in love with him again that will help and if jobs begin to flow before his term is up independents will begin approving of him again.

So first, this sounds like a prompt for a class, is that the case? If so know that this forum is not really a great source for information. If you're just asking..

I think each president has had progressively more and more coverage by the media, and as such has had a worse and worse time of a personal life. I don't know whether he is a better or worse president, but I do think that his mistakes are highlighted more than previous presidents.

Oh no. I'd like to hear opinions from the fine folks here at MW, I'm in no way involved in the education system of my country, nor do I live in the US, as a matter of fact. Which is one of the reasons why I'd like to hear from healthy-minded Americans.

Quote:
Originally Posted by El_frenchie View Post
But do you think, compared to his predecessors, that Obama is more or less a bigger target because of the presence of rampant media?
More than Bush? yes, more than Clinton? arguably, but there's less of a difference, albeit Clinton didn't had to deal with the sheer amount of
He's muslim! he's not american! birth certificate! hitler AND stalin!
idiocy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by El_frenchie View Post
As far as I'm aware, B.Obama is the first American president to answer questions online.
I think so too, albeit i'm not particularly sure. Politicians on lower strata (governors/senators and the like) have used it before him tho.
Then again, i doubt he has done much of that since he became president.

Quote:
Originally Posted by El_frenchie View Post
He said he wished for more transparency on behalf of the administration. And, in truth, I do hear more about the US now than when G.Bush was up there in the White House. Do you think that this new transparency is actually the president's doing, or is it a side effect caused by the emergence of social networking giants Twitter&Facebook? (And they just rolled with it)
That, i don't agree with. He promised for more transparency, but immediately took up the same politics of the previous administration. Hearing more about the US is not more transparency, just more general noise, specifically, big media doing noise.
The Bush administration didn't had to deal with much of that during most of their 8 years: while independent media from the left slandered him from beginning to end, the large media companies where happy to turn a blind eye to it's blunders: they weren't there to call for transparency, or for starting two wars, or for concealing the photos of the caskets returning home, similarly, they wheren't there to criticize his tax cuts to the rich. It wasn't until it's late years, with the economic crisis booming, that everyone and their grandmothers started fleeing the boat and laying the blame.

Obama, on the other hand, haves, aah, i dunno, faux news calling him a foreigner terrorist muslim socialist nazi on a daily basis. Or politicians openly interrupting him on the middle of a speech.

On the same vein, saying facebook or twitter is allowing more transparency is a joke. More venues of information trade? yes, albeit the internet, with all it's forums and blogs and the like has been around since long before. Transparency is more often the result of information leaks (see: wikileaks) than of twitter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by El_frenchie View Post
I am of the opinion that ignorance is bliss and Obama's dropping popularity is, mostly, caused by the free (And sometimes superfluous/gratuitous) flow of information.

Opinions?
I attribute Obama's dropping popularity to:
1) not fulfilling campaign promises
2) not supporting policy vehemently enough, often urging democrats to make concessions and watering down proposals until they are a shadow of what they once were (DADT? still waiting, his only actions regarding it have been to make more concessions to republicans. He was also largely absent during the health care debate, with the white house refusing to comment most of the time).
3) Slandering his voting base (not too long ago, his administration insulted the left and refused to apology)

On the other hand, the noisier opposition to obama comes from the republicans catering to the extreme right, from the party itself shifting their policies to more extreme versions, to republican candidates being dropped by the party for not saying Obama is muslim, to giving their lunacy a voice with fox news.

Honestly, I feel bad for him. And I'd feel bad for McCain too if he was elected. This was one of the tougher times to start at, to say the least. And also, people just seem to like making fun of the president regardless of who he is. Obama is the first African American president, he's young, there was question about his birth, and has a lot of other things working against him that idiots can use (whether legitimate/factual or not).

Now, I'm not saying Obama is the best president ever or that he's perfect. He's made mistakes and I wish he handled some things differently.

As for the transparency, I think it has increased thanks to the media and investigative journalism and the like. I'm not sure if that's a good or bad thing yet, but I'll find out soon I'm sure.

One important thing to note though, is that I've been mor politically aware this administration than last mostly because I've gotten older and will be voting for the first time in November. I won't comment on the Bush administration as I know there's a lot I'm missing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Illien View Post
Obama, on the other hand, haves, aah, i dunno, faux news calling him a foreigner terrorist muslim socialist nazi on a daily basis. Or politicians openly interrupting him on the middle of a speech.
Wasn't similar with W. Bush? (except that he wasn't a communist and Nazi just merely a Nazi) Accusing him of staging 9/11? Threats to emigrate to Canada? Bets whether he would organize next election or continue his presidency with violation of constitution?


I'm not sure how it looks from the US, but from Europe I had the following feeling - first an impressive media campaign bringing insane level of hopes for left wing, insane level of fears for the right... and then, when I watch his policies from time to time... just a calm moderate left-wing politician.

Clearly financial crisis and budget deficit left by Bush left Obama him in a poor position, especially that is hard to win election promising austerity and responsible fiscal policy.

It seems for me that just US society becomes terribly polarised. And next guy (regardless whether Republican or Democrat) will be also hated by big part of society and accused of the most insane things.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TW Teczka View Post
Wasn't similar with W. Bush? (except that he wasn't a communist and Nazi just merely a Nazi) Accusing him of staging 9/11? Threats to emigrate to Canada? Bets whether he would organize next election or continue his presidency with violation of constitution?
By conspiracy theorists? always, by mainstream media within the USA? nope. There's the difference i'm mentioning.

Obama has been extremely naive and is now coming face to face with the stupidity of some of his remarks. Just recently his talking down BP and demands to return the Iranian terrorist Al Megrahi (responsible for Lockerbie) to jail are idiotic in the extreme.

I just posted on this topic in another forum:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlictoatl View Post
[...]

IMO, this is a very serious condition of our times. We have always had people willing to distort or pervert the facts of a situation to meet some agenda of their own, but it is only relatively recently that we have had the social media networks that allow literally anyone to say pretty much anything they want with very little oversight and censure. There used to be certain barriers to self-serving hacks acquiring a national voice in the media, and there is no longer such.

From the man who fabricated the video of Shirley Sherrod, resulting in her firing, to this blogger distorting facts about Cordoba House to turn it into the latest hyperbolic feeding frenzy, to this insanity about Obama's citizenship and religious affiliation, we suffer at the hands of individuals and organizations whose entire agenda is to misrepresent, divide, cause strife, and manipulate.

Thankfully the man behind the Shirley Sherrod incident can be civilly prosecuted. I wish it were possible to pass laws making this type of behavior a greater crime, for I feel my country will continue to disintegrate under the shrill partisanship and greed of these people willing to do whatever it takes for their moment of fame, even if it is tearing down the station of the presidency or people who are trying to do good work in the world.
IMO, there are three issues causing such problems for Obama:

1) He's black. There are major forces at play in the US that cannot accept a black President, and they will use every tactic they can uncover to defame him, including going so far as to tear down the station of the Presidency. People in this country were freaking out during the elections that a 'Muslim' was going to be in office. Town Hall-style gatherings/rallies in the name of Republicans often had a lynching tone/mentality. There's video of some of this erupting during a McCain rally, and McCain tried to talk them down, but not very convincingly. His running-mate, Sarah Palin, incited the flames both then and now. This goes further than partisan extremism, into veiled racism.

2) We live in a day and age when there is so much money to made through leveraging the social media to spout vile partisanship that a large number of people are doing so. Partisanship and fighting for one's beliefs is one thing. Lying, distorting issues, misrepresenting facts, and social manipulation is another.

3) Obama alienated his constituency by conducting business as usual. It's clear he works for the same employers as previous administrations, of whichever side (and I'm not referring to the US populace). He has the largest pulpit in the country -- conceivably, in the world -- and he could be pulling apart the fabric that these shrill detractors stand upon, but he's not.

It would be a simple matter for him to stand in a press conference and say, "Look... people in the media are lying to you. Cordoba House, this supposed 'mosque at Ground Zero' isn't a mosque and it isn't at Ground Zero. It was being reported on for months -- the front page of the NY Times and other significant places -- with practically zero opposition. It wasn't until bloggers with an agenda for wedge politics -- inciting partisanship to tear apart our country for political gain -- got a hold of the issue that it blew up.

This sort of thing needs to stop. We need to stop allowing these people who are out for profit and their twisted political agendas -- and they're on both sides of the aisle, don't get me wrong -- we have to stop allowing them to tear us apart. The United States of America is the greatest country in the world when we operate from a place of unity and forward-thinking, when we do the hard work of working together to make this a better place for all, when we fly in the face of convention and do what is right. And all of us know what is right -- extend a hand to your neighbor, help people when they need it, believe in your community, and do what needs to be done for all to prosper. Feed your family, yes, protect your property, yes, but don't ignore your neighbors either.

Stop listening to these bullies who are using the media to manipulate you, your families, and your thinking. They aren't actually giving you a better life, they're just stirring the pot of incitement and they are tearing us all down."


But he won't do that. I don't think he's really in office to heal the Nation. He's in the office to conduct business-as-usual, with a mildly progressive spin. It'll soon be the other side's turn to do that, and then the shrill voices will be on the other side of the very narrow aisle.

I sincerely wish the US would adopt a parliamentarian system of governance. The two-party system has gotten too artificially polarized, when there is actually very little separating the two parties. It feels to me like a circus fabricated to disguise the fact that the clowns are essentially wearing the same costume. Were we to adopt a parliamentarian system, at least it would become more obvious that our two primary parties are much closer to each other than not, and some of the voices that are truly progressive or truly conservative could have some life and influence of their own.




 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Last Database Backup 2024-03-28 10:38:20am local time
Myth-Weavers Status