Pages

Wednesday, May 15, 2013

Is It Game Over?

I often have sympathy for the burdens on the shoulders of President Obama for issues and crises that span the globe. I'm not--by nature--a cruel man, after all. But I do find that my level of sympathy is directly proportional to the time since I last heard the president give a policy speech or press conference.

It isn't just me, it seems:

Obama’s aloof mien and holier-than-thou rhetoric have left him with little reservoir of good will, even among Democrats. And the press, after years of being accused of being soft on Obama while being berated by West Wing aides on matters big and small, now has every incentive to be as ruthless as can be.

This White House’s instinctive petulance, arrogance and defensiveness have all worked to isolate Obama at a time when he most needs a support system.

For me, the longer it has been since I observed that P, A, and D, the more sympathy I'd have for the president when pondering any given defense or foreign policy issue he faces.

I certainly don't think President Obama is threatened with irrelevancy. No matter what the recent scandals and no matter how many reporters have taken their investigative curiosity out of the blind trust it has been in the last 5 years, the president will be relevant. So I don't wonder if the game is over on the president.

No. What I wonder is if the conservative parlor game of pondering press reaction to something President Obama has done "if Bush had done it" is going to go away?

If the press starts to treat President Obama the way they treated Bush 43, that game is over.

UPDATE: More on why my sympathy for the burdens of the president increase the longer the president has not spoken on policy issues.