Splicetoday

Politics & Media
Nov 12, 2008, 07:10AM

Obama's "New Politics" Still Seem Underhanded

The president-elect could have handled the post-Bush meeting a little better by matching W.'s magnanimity.

Obamabush.jpg?ixlib=rails 2.1

Like many, I watched with interest this week as President-elect Obama visited President Bush at the White House. While watching the video and seeing the pictures of Bush and Obama, I was sincerely moved. Sometimes the beauty of our democracy is apparent when I would least expect it, and yesterday was a wonderful example of so much of what makes our country great.  Last night, when I read that Bush and Obama had talked for nearly two hours—but without any aides, note-takers, etc.—literally alone—I was again somewhat awed by the largeness of the moment. Here were only the 43rd and soon-to-be 44th people to hold this office in the history of our country, talking in a refreshingly frank, open (and presumably off-the-record) manner.
 
The Monday meeting was another example of the grace with which President Bush has handled the transition so far. Bush's magnanimity here should not be surprising, though, because despite whatever faults he has, Bush should be credited for the deep, clearly genuine and emotional reverence he has always displayed for the office and institution of the presidency. It's a level of respect that I would hope all presidents would show for the office, and for the extraordinary responsibilities accompanying it.
 
In the wake of yesterday's meeting, however, I was disappointed in Obama when he and/or his aides leaked details of Obama's and Bush's conversation to the media. Making matters worse, the leak was done for crass political posturing, specifically about the question of whether the federal government should bail out GM or other struggling US automakers. I would think (or at least hope), that even "the One" would hold some things sacred, and that accordingly, he would maintain the confidentiality and trust that such a meeting deserves. Apparently I was wrong.
 
Barack Obama was not the candidate I supported in this election, but I certainly share in the celebration of our country's election of its first African-American president. Additionally I have always acknowledged what an impressive candidate Obama was, and he is clearly intelligent, remarkably articulate, and amazingly inspirational to many.  He will soon be my president too, and I wish him success. He won last week in part by promising a new kind of politics, and while I was never clear what precisely that meant, I hope this isn't the first example of it. If so, it's neither the path to success nor the way to win the support of the 57 million Americans who voted for another candidate.

Discussion
  • Bragg, Obama wasn't my choice either, but I'm willing to give him more slack than you. I don't think it's constructive to dub him, sarcastically, as "The One." The campaign's over, and he'll have hiccups while assembling his team and learning how to deal with the media as President and not a candidate. I sincerely wish him the best as President. Once an election is over, shouldn't all Americans at least give the new President some breathing room, regardless of who you supported in the election?

    Responses to this comment
  • I don't understand where you're getting this "deep, clearly genuine and emotional reverence he has always displayed for the office and institution of the presidency." I'm not saying he has tried to sabotage the office; I just feel like if he truly had respect for it, he wouldn't have led an administration that valued loyalty above intelligence and achievement.

    Responses to this comment
  • it was a minor slip-up by the Obama camp, leaking details of the "private" meeting to the media scum. I don't buy the Bush Has Grace theme, but I really hope Obama isn't getting off to a start like Clinton. He's way classier than that, unless he's misled by advisers.

    Responses to this comment
  • I admire republicans who are lining up in support behind Obama now that the election's done, you should do the same Bragg.

    Responses to this comment
  • AppleHead: "Media scum"? Please. This sort of leak has been part of politics for as long as there has been human speech, and certainly as long as there have been advisers, aides, and limo drivers. I doubt very much that any conversation - on or off-the-record - has been considered truly private in the white house since ever. Bragg, this article is ridiculous. Can you even imagine a political landscape where this didn't happen? Maybe in a McCain administration....

    Responses to this comment
  • Dan, surely you're not so naive to believe that the media is held in high esteem by the public. And like lawyers and politicians, who also get low marks, the public scorn is well-deserved. What I was trying to say is that Obama has the opportunity for a clean break of the recent political polarization, and he and his aides ought to treat reporters like the self-serving jackals they are. Obviously there will and have always been leaks from administrations; my hope is that Obama and his team beat the media at their own game, much the way Reagan did.

  • Your article "seems" to be written as objective except that you idealize President Bush with your phrase "the genuine and emotional reverence he has displayed for the office". Baloney! If the Bush Admin. held any respect for the office of President and V.P., they would never have started war without justification, tortured prisoners of war, trampled on the Constitutional Rights of America's citizens and all of the other dishonest things they did while in office. You also call President-elect Obama "the One" in a sarcastic tone and then say you wish him success. Why not be honest and instead of two-faced and talking out of both sides of your mouth!

    Responses to this comment
  • AppleHead, I and many others actually hold a lot of the press in high esteem. Most of the scorn you talk about has been manufactured by politicians who don't like how they're covered. Perhaps you should find a better newspaper.

    Responses to this comment
  • Dan, that would put you in the minority, which isn't necessarily a bad place to be. Nonetheless, politicians have always had a love-hate relationship with the press; consumers are now doing the talking. I do find some of the NY Times worthwhile, as well as the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal, but that's about it. You?

    Responses to this comment
  • If you like the Times, Journal and Post, where exactly does your hatred for the mainstream media come from? You dislike USAToday? Seems you're on pretty good terms with the big papers.

    Responses to this comment
  • I said I found *some* of the content in those papers worthwhile, not all. And it's not improving; the campaign coverage wasn't nearly as decent as even 8 years ago, as dailies try and ape the electronic media, which is a fool's errand.

    Responses to this comment
  • I think if the majority of the news-consuming public held the press in such low esteem we wouldn't have a wealth of news outlets such as we do. We have certainly become more savvy consumers when it comes to news, but that does not equal contempt.

    Responses to this comment
  • And, by the way AppleHead, use your real name next time you want to talk about journalistic integrity. It smacks of hypocrisy this way. I'm just sayin'.

    Responses to this comment

Register or Login to leave a comment