It wasn’t too long ago that Obama wasn’t funny. That is, none of the late-night comics thought he was funny. The New Yorker couldn’t run a funny cartoon on its cover. Obama was above jokes. You don’t laugh at “sort of God,” you see. But as the mask of competence slips and the blunders mount, he becomes once again a comic target. Howard Kurtz tells us Obama is now really in trouble because he’s lost Jon Stewart:
It was inevitable that Obama would become a late-night target, at least when Jay Leno, Conan O’Brien and Dave Letterman have taken time out from sliming each other. But Stewart, who makes no secret of leaning left, is a pop-culture bellwether. And while the White House notes that Obama used the prompter to address journalists, not the students, the details matter little in comedy.
Stewart’s barbs are generating partisan buzz. …
“He’s clearly become an important cultural arbiter,” says Robert Lichter, director of the Center for Media and Public Affairs. “He’s pulled off the trick of being taken seriously when he wants to be and taken frivolously when he wants to be.”
What is even more remarkable is that “real” news people seem to take their cues from a comic. He’s an “icon” to real journalists, Kurtz tells us. He quotes Brian Williams: “A lot of the work that Jon and his staff do is serious. They hold people to account, for errors and sloppiness.” Well, everything is relative, I suppose. The “real” media’s disinclination to treat Obama as roughly as they have treated previous presidents has left the field wide open for a cable network comic to play the role that independent journalists used to — holding the White House accountable, skewering the president for errors, and refusing to take seriously the spin coming from administration flacks.
It may be that Stewart’s newfound boldness in ribbing Obama is indicative of a change in Obama’s fortunes. But it also speaks volumes about the reluctance of the entire media — serious and otherwise — for the better part of a year to critically assess Obama’s policies and political instincts.
Now that the spell is broken and Obama is “funny,” maybe the media will discover he is also fodder for serious reporting. Perhaps they will ask some serious questions — when and if he ever gives another press conference. How was it that he claimed that the Christmas Day bomber was an isolated extremist? Did he really let Eric Holder come up with the idea all on his own for a New York trial for KSM? Did Obama not know that his own health-care plan would chase Americans out of their own health-care plans? Why did he sign an omnibus spending bill with 9,000 earmarks if earmarks are nothing more than petty corruption? How can he say the stimulus is a success if he promised it would keep unemployment at 8 percent? There is nothing funny about any of those issues, but the media might want to press the president for answers to these and other queries. At least if they want to stay ahead of Jon Stewart.
No one will accuse you of heresy tonight, Jennifer, if you give Obama his due. African-Americans in this country have also walked a long, hard road. Tonight is an achievement for all Americans, not just Obama supporters.
Everyone talks about the need for the working-class white male as the central key, but then once that demographic seems to be locked up, the speculating always turns to the soccer-mom or one of the minority groups.
So here’s what we know: A majority of the white working class men will not vote for an extreme liberal – it has nothing to do with being black although his upcoming McGovern like loss will forever be blamed on such.
And he’s losing a considerable chunk of every minority group that the Democrats have always relied.
The math is working against Obama in every conceivable way.
Everyone talks about the need for the working-class white male as the central key, but then once that demographic seems to be locked up, the speculating always turns to the soccer-mom or one of the minority groups.
So here’s what we know: A majority of the white working class men will not vote for an extreme liberal – it has nothing to do with being black although his upcoming McGovern like loss will forever be blamed on such.
And he’s losing a considerable chunk of every minority group that the Democrats have always relied.
The math is working against Obama in every conceivable way.
Yup. Obama is not going to win in November. Unless, the media declare him as winner even without counting the votes.
There is the risk, now that Obama has claimed the nomination that he could just abandon/ignore Jewish concerns. The Democrat Jewish bloc is in for a very difficult time – if they get annoyed by being ignored or by Obama’s views on the I/P issue they could be branded racist (like everyone who hasn’t voted for Obama has been called) or they could be ostracised as a subversive “Zionist Lobby” undermining US interests and the Democrat party (sort of like W&M’s views which are mainstream in the far left) in the election, or they could be considered unloyal and purged from the party (Lieberman).
The greater risk is for US Jews, especially if they are sympathetic to Israel, is if he gets elected. When it comes to the crunch who is he going to support? Those on the far-left, who have helped him win and who he agrees with, or some expendable Jews who wont be able to do much for 4 years…
Nepat: Spoken like a true chief of racial identity politics. No, tonight is an important night for those who agree with Obama. For the others, whether supporters of HRC or McCain, it’s not an important night, just a signal to roll up their sleeves because the main slog is about to commence.
I include HRC in that because she has zero incentive in seeing Obama beat McCain. Quite the contrary. If Obama continues to succeed in labeling himself as a hard left candidate (as he has done thus far through his won gaffes and mishandling of his radical associates) then he may well be a candidate who does not return in 2012. Indeed, there’s a greater chance that a successful McCain would be a one-term president than a successful Obama.
HRC has laid a trap for Obama, one that is designed to feign cooperation while in the end further dividing the party. The rationale is straightforward: Obama would be a fool to accept the personal agenda driven HRC, with husband to match, as VP; yet if he rejects her, she can claim the high ground in having attempted to unify the party all the while “allowing” her core to drift towards McCain or simply not vote–something which may well occur in any event.
It is embarrasing, and saddening, to note that Obama’s long association with Israel-haters, and the transparent phoniness of his recent claims to be pro-Israel, will cost him, at most, 20% of the Jewish vote. That is to say, while Hillary probably would have gotten at least 80% of the Jewish vote, Obama will probably do no worse than 60%.
For most American Jews – even most of those who are genuinely concerned about Israel’s future – loyalty to the left and the Democratic party is a bedrock, unconditional, nonnegotiable part of their identity. The Democrats could probably nominate David Bonior or Keith Ellison and still count on winning the Jewish vote, even against a RINO like McCain. (Yes, McCain’s a RINO.)
Obama claims that Jews won’t heed his word because of their “irrational fears?” His Christ complex gets worse every day. All of his other faults aside, Americans are missing a very important fact regarding the affirmative action candidate: HE IS EMOTIONALLY UNSTABLE. He may be mentally unstable as well. A brief study of his words and actions leave no doubt.
Sadly enough, I doubt many who read this comment would agree. Even conservatives tend to fall all over themselves to make excuses for the Obamessiah. Get over your White guilt complex, people. He isn’t even Black.