Has Media Let Obama’s Reversal Pass Unnoticed?
Posted on November 26, 2008
-By Warner Todd Huston
Obama is starting to feel a bit of pressure from members of the far left of his own party who are beginning to raise their eyebrows over the fact that he hasn’t shown any desire to institute any “change” thus far with his staff and cabinet picks even though they had “hope” that he would. Obama went so far as to address the situation today as MSNBC reported on its FirstRead blog.
Obama explains away his lack of “change” and his picking of a plethora of out-of-work Clintonites by saying that who he puts on his staff and cabinet don’t matter. It’s because he is the change we seek, you see? But, wait, you might ask. If the press were paying attention, they might remember that during his acceptance speech he said this whole thing wasn’t about him, it was about us? Wasn’t it that we were the change we were waiting for… right?
Is the press going to let him get away with dropping that hoary rhetoric only to say now it’s suddenly all about him? Would they let such arrogance, such a flip-flop, from a Republican pass so easily?
We might recall Obama’s supposed self-deprecation during his acceptance speech in front of the expensive, simulated Greek columns of Obamopolis at the end of the Democratic National Convention.
“But I stand before you tonight because all across America something is stirring. What the nay-sayers don’t understand is that this election has never been about me. It’s been about you.”
But, now all of a sudden it is all about him?
Well, it certainly looks like he’s changed his tune. It IS about him after all.
In response to criticism that he is departing from his promise to bring change to Washington because several members of his economic team were Beltway insiders, Barack Obama said today that his team would combine experience with fresh thinking and his own vision for change.
“Understand where the vision for change comes from, first and foremost,” he told reporters at his third press conference in as many days. “It comes from me. That’s my job, is to provide a vision in terms of where we are going, and to make sure, then, that my team is implementing.”
Of course, the reason he’s come out to say that it’s really all about him after all is to knock aside any charges that he is starting out as the junior member of the new Clinton era. He wants to assert that he is really in charge, of course.
But, this is a complete reversal of the “we are the ones” rhetoric he was mouthing only weeks ago. But, the “no it’s all about me” turn around does fit the arrogance of the non-existent “office of the president elect” conceit he’s indulged in, doesn’t it?
So far, though, the arrogance has been wholly unremarked upon by a pliant media.
Surprised, anyone?
» Filed Under Barack Obama, Democrats, Elections, Liberal Media/Bias, News
Trackback URL
Comments
8 Responses to “Has Media Let Obama’s Reversal Pass Unnoticed?”
Leave a Reply
America isn’t used to the use of the “royal we” as like the famous line by Queen Victoria “We(Queen Victoria) are not amused”
So what “the One” was saying is that “we” (Obama) were the change we (Obama) were waiting for.
So we can translate his words as I am the change I have been waiting for (if you translate from the royal we).
Either that or the first “we” was Obama and the second we was his koolaid squad.
You never know who Obama is referring to when he says “we” as it could be himself (the royal we).
sO WHAT DO THE PROGRESSIVE NUTBALLS WANT oBAMA TO DO-BESIDE GIVING THENATION TO THE NUTS THAT WANT CHANGE LIKE PUTIN OFFERS? LET’S HEART IT FOR OLD BLOOODY JOE AND THE GULAGS AND THE SIBERIAN LABOR CAMPS. GIVE THE YOUNG MAN A CHANCE AT HIS IDEAS SINCE YOU GAVE HIM THE ELECTION
How can there be ‘vision’ without knowledge?
Obama knows nothing about everything. He has been told what to say and what to do by other minds with other agendas.
He is a figurehead who will follow orders because his only ‘job’ is to bask in his own ego.
Alright, this is just stupid. The country, “we”, elected Obama with a clear majority vote. Thus, we have announced that Obama’s policies are what we want. What do you expect, Obama pulling a Carter and convening a group of people at Camp David? Only on a much larger scale?
Why don’t you actually see Obama’s policies in action before you make your predictable overly-partisan attack of anything Democratic.
Well Bill, so far we have heard a lot of talk from Obama but nothing is different from any other politician except Obama maybe the most inexperienced politition ever voted into office first his change involves most of Clintons old cronies keeping Bushes tax cuts
not even any idea about what to do with Iraq or afganistan he isn’t even sworn in office and his inexperience is showing big time …so how much time do we give him …till the walls fall all the way down?
Hey Bill,
Hmmmm….Obama’s picks so far are:
1. Mostly white.
2. Mostly male.
3. Mostly “Old DC Hands.”
4. Mostly on the back side of 60
Note: Obama’s latest pick to head his economic advisory council is the “young, fresh” Paul Volcker, age 81 (Princeton, Class of 1949), who’s been bouncing in and out of Washington for longer than you’ve been alive. Heck, Volcker started working at Treasury in 1962–when JFK was still very much alive and “slipping his PT-109″ to Marilyn Monroe on a regular basis.
C’mon, let’s see you do the “Hope and Change Happy Dance” one more time!
So what’s next? Bill Clinton as UN ambassador and Monica as his deputy working under him?
It’s always been about him. Some people had too much glitz in their eyes to see it, though. (That’s why it’s helpful to have a jaded opinion about ALL politicians, low expectations, so if they happen to stumble into doing something good or right, there’s a surprise like used to be in the bottom of the cereal box when I was a kid.)
“WE” – Whenever I said “we” as a kid, my dad always asked me if I were speaking French or if I had a mouse in my pocket. Admittedly, I get the French-speaking part, but to this day I still don’t get the mouse part.
@Bill: You voted him in on his policies, which seem to be mutating from day to day – not MORPHING but MUTATING. Funny, I thought you elected him based on Policy A (now Policy A-128769 and nothing resembling the original “A”), Policy B (now Policy B-488722 and nothing resembling the original “B”), etc. etc. etc. Now that those policies you elected him on are no longer in existence – sometimes at complete right angles to the promises that got him elected – how can you continue to support those policies?
His flip-flopping now is NO different than the continuous flips and flops he exhibited during his campaign:
1. “Will I take public financing? Yes.” Later, after seeing the potential money machine at work, “No, we’re going to run based on contributions from ‘the little guy.’”
2. “I don’t believe my church is particularly controversial” followed days later by “Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes.”
3. “I support NAFTA.” “Well, no I don’t.”
4. Just Say NO to Michigan and Florida primary elections! Well…. let’s count them after all.
The list goes on and on and on…
Change for the sake of change. Personally, I quit caring much. They’re all cut from the same cloth, have the same pattern and weave, and the only change is that we’re using the backside of the same printed bolt.