An accurate depiction of the GOP’s health care plan

I wish more Democrats would call out Republicans like Grayson:

Obama’s Funhouse of Mirrors

This article in the New York Times pretty much articulates how the current media circus works in valuing conflict over rational logic.

Key quote:

Were there 1,000 angry people with guns outside the town halls, or just one angry guy we saw 1,000 times? In all the noise and velocity of the coverage, it’s hard to know. But in the minds of many viewers — and TV hosts — the answer doesn’t matter. What matters is “there’s anger out there.”

That is the key point: the main power that the media currently holds is not speaking truth to power and relaying that to the masses. Currently, the media’s main power stems from its ability to shape and frame perception. If it is only one person shouting, it doesn’t matter if it’s being played over and over again a thousand times. It gives the perception that the anger is real out there.

However, most pundits’ prescreption and diagnosis of this event is still wildly misdiagnosed. Take, for example, the last statement in the article:

“I think that what you are seeing is some on-the-job learning,” said Lanny Davis, former White House counsel in the Clinton administration who now advises clients on media strategy. “He and his team, in spite of running a wonderful campaign, have never faced this kind of opposition now that there is blood in the water, and I think they are just beginning to figure out what they are up against.

I find this statement rather patronizing, treating Obama’s administration as if they are just naive rookies that are “on-the-job” learners. While there is no denying that every first-term president faces a major learning curve, the backlash that Obama is facing is truly something we’ve never seen before, in the sense that it’s unclear what, exactly, is being backlashed against, and even who, and how many, people are actually backlashing. In many ways, it seems that the Obama administration must constantly assess themselves within a carnival funhouse of mirrors. They continually must decide if they themselves are truly distorted, or if its the mirror itself (in this case, the media) which is making things look distorted. The real problem with this is that the American people are also using the same criteria to make their own evaluations as well. This leaves a lot of people confused, because we don’t even know anymore what it is that we’re supposed to be looking at, and can’t remember what a “normal” mirror is anymore.

I find this all very disturbing, because when a mass public is overwhelmingly confused and unclear about what a good leader actually is supposed to look like and accomplish, then people stop acknowleding them as authorities. That’s a real problem for a republic, whose system of ELECTED officials depends upon a common shared trust between the public and its representatives.

I personally am worried.

”

Hat Tip: Dad

Obama’s Health Care Strategy: The Horse Whisperer

John Dickerson’s article in Slate this week discusses Obama’s apparent “missteps” in the health care reform debate.

Key quote:

On health care, it’s clear that Obama is still working out his riff. He’s been talking about the subject for months and yet the number of people who disapprove of his handling of the issue continues to rise. In several polls, people now disapprove of his performance more than they approve. He has pushed the idea that health care reform will not increase the deficit—to the exclusion of other arguments he might make—and yet the message is not getting through. In a recent Quinnipiac University poll, voters did not believe, by a margin of 72 percent to 21 percent, that Obama will keep his promise to overhaul the health care system without adding to the deficit.

To me, this article is just another out of countless examples of supposed political “experts” underestimating Obama. Seriously, he has been underestimated so many times that it’s become laughable now. When are they going to get it?

Does Conan O’Brien read my blog?

He seems to have reached the same conclusion about Sarah Palin’s writing as I have:

Double Your Pleasure, Double Your Fun

Wedding videos seem to have become a trend in my recent blogging, but this is too fun to pass up:

Hat Tip: Dad

Palin’s Resignation: Revised

Vanity Fair decides to brush up a bit on Palin’s masterpiece. Clearly they have no concept of true genius. Like everyone else, they keep trying to box her in.

I mean, who cares William Seward was a member of Andrew Johnson’s cabinet and not Abraham Lincoln’s? They just don’t get art.

One Small Step

In honor of the moon landing 40 years ago: