The Trouble With Adoration

I almost always cringe when someone is nearly universally liked by the media, be it a liberal, moderate, conservative, entertainer, writer, athlete, etc. When an individual is adored, real constructive criticism is harder to come by, which can then lead to this individual getting away with far more than the average person.

Imagine if George W. Bush was extremely well liked (I can hear people scoff now) and popular. His ratings are at 92% favorable, the economy is great, and Iraq is a complete success. Do you think this would make him more likely to invade Iran, for instance, or less likely? Obviously, more likely. President Bush may not care as much as previous presidents about popular opinion, but with a less-than-friendly media after him 24/7, you better believe that he's much more careful in his actions now than he was right after 9/11 when he had the highest favorable rating of any U.S. president in history.

This has been the problem I have had with Barack Obama. The man is adored by the media, there's no doubt. Now, the very fact of this, does not make him a bad person, not at all. The problem is that a politician adored by the media is not properly vetted, thus a complete picture is not given to the public, hence why 99% of America had never heard of Obama's controversial pastor until last week.

Everyone, especially politicians, has skeletons in their closet. However, my concern here is not what those skeletons are, but rather the fact that the media decides which ones we will hear about, unless you devote hours and hours to researching for yourself. Obama gave a very well conceived speech yesterday in Philadelphia. In fact, it was probably the best possible speech he could have given in response to this situation, politically speaking that is. Although his speaking manner was considerably more flat and less charismatic than usual, the context was a nice piece of work by his speech writers. Will this solve his "pastor problems"? Well, it will for the most ardent Obama supporters, and even for many moderate Democrats. However, this speech will simply not be enough for most Independents and the vast majority of Republicans. In fact, the recent polling data is pretty remarkable:

Zogby: Obama 47%, Clinton 44%, He was ahead by 14 points just a couple of weeks ago.
Gallup: Clinton 49%, Obama 42%, Clinton on top.
Rasmussen: Obama 47% Clinton 42%, No statistical difference.

*All three polling organizations have McCain ahead of the two Democratic contenders.

The mainstream media's response to Obama's speech was quite predictable. Two items in the media that caught my attention:

From CBS' "Early Show": Maggie Rodriguez opens the segment with, "It's being called a defining cultural moment in America. Barack Obama speaks about America's racial stalemate, a moving moment, a political risk." and later on says, "It was without question a defining moment in American political history."[edit: emphasis mine]

From the New York Times: "It was an extraordinary moment — the first black candidate with a good chance at becoming a presidential nominee, in a country in which racial distrust runs deep and often unspoken, embarking at a critical juncture in his campaign upon what may be the most significant public discussion of race in decades."[edit: emphasis mine] The author goes on to compare Obama to Lincoln and JFK.

To be fair, ABC News had a story labeled, "Buried in Eloquence, Obama Contradictions About Pastor" It asserts that Obama "contradicted more than a year of denials and spin from him and his staff about his knowledge of Rev. Jeremiah Wright's controversial sermons."

Be assured though, that the vast majority of reporting was significantly in Obama's favor.

I'll leave you with this latest Pew Research Institute report, which (with absolute no surprise to me) found that among journalists:

Only six percent said they considered themselves conservatives and only two percent said they were very conservative. This compares with 36 percent of the overall population that describes itself as conservative. Most journalists, 53 percent, said they're moderate. 24 percent said they were liberal and eight percent very liberal.

That means that 32% of journalists consider themselves at least "liberal" while only 8% consider themselves at least "conservative". This is no where close to the actual demographic make-up of the American public, thus this should give you all the more reason to be skeptical of what you hear.