Latest anti-Sarah Palin tactic: Tie her down

The latest effort by liberals in their ongoing campaign to neutralize Sarah Palin is to keep her from leaving Alaska to attend events like CPAC (the Conservative Political Action Conference) on the grounds that she’s “not putting Alaska first” if she does events outside the state.  Now, I realize that folks on the Left don’t really care whether this is true or not; they simply want to use this to accomplish two things:  one, to keep her from providing leadership and energy to a national GOP that badly needs both; and two, they hope, to chip away at her popularity in Alaska enough that they can defeat her in next year’s election.  That said, they clearly think that Alaskans will buy the charge, or else they wouldn’t be complaining about this.  For my part, I hope that the people of Alaska don’t buy it, because to do so would be remarkably short-sighted.To explain why I say this, let me use myself as an example.  I have more reason to think about Alaska than most Americans in the Lower 48.  I grew up in the Pacific Northwest, in western Washington, near the coast.  I have friends who live in Alaska year-round, and others who spend part of the year up there.  My parents have made several trips to Alaska; in consequence, my three girls have a number of Alaska books and T-shirts.  When I was looking for a church in 2006-07, there were congregations in a couple places in Alaska that I really wanted to talk to, until my wife reminded me that my mother-in-law would filet me alive if I took her grandchildren that far away from Michigan.  (We ended up in Indiana instead.  Less scenic, but definitely safer.)And how often did I think about Alaska before I started researching Gov. Palin?  Occasionally.  Very occasionally.  How often do I think about Alaska now?  A good deal more often.  I know a lot more about the state, its issues, and its contributions to the health and strength of our nation than I did.  Why?  Because of Gov. Palin—because her arrival on the national political scene brought her state into the national political consciousness in a whole new way.As a consequence, I think it’s fair to say that for Gov. Palin to be speaking and making appearances around the country, including on major media, would not be putting Alaska second or shortchanging her home state (as long as she continues to carry out the responsibilities of her job, at least, which I have no doubt she will); rather, for her to do so would be a real benefit to the Great Land, because in keeping her own profile high, she will keep Alaska’s profile high as well—and that can only be a good thing for this most federally-dependent state in the Union.

Why America needs Sarah Palin

This is Gov. Palin’s 2009 State of the State address, which she wrote herself; the video of the speech is posted at the end of the text.  For those who may have forgotten (since it’s been so long, on a national level), this is what a conservative government looks like:

Thank you. Our good Lieutenant Governor Parnell, President Stevens, Speaker Chenault, lawmakers, Native Leaders, my dear family, and all Alaskans. Thank you for this opportunity.First, please join me in thanking those who protect our freedoms that allow us to assemble—our good men and women in uniform—they are America’s finest, our U.S. military.It’s been quite a year since we last gathered in this chamber. Just two days ago we witnessed a shining moment in the history of our country. Millions of Americans are praying for the success of our new president, and I am one of them. His work is cut out for him, but if President Obama governs with the skill, grace and greatness of which he is capable, Alaska’s going to be just fine. We congratulate President Obama.And, for keeping the homeland safe, and being a friend to Alaska, I thank President Bush.2008 was the year when America looked to Alaska, and one of our own sprang to national attention. There was political drama, controversy, lively debate, a few awkward moments and in the end, some disappointment. But what a glorious debut for a unique Alaskan—and we congratulate our former Senator Mike Gravel.In the history of Alaska, it was also the conclusion of a long and distinguished Senate career. We look forward to working with his successor, Senator Mark Begich. The best to our new man in Washington. And to working with long-serving Representative Young and Senator Murkowski. Congratulations on her worthy committee assignments.Tonight, I’m pleased to see new faces here, and I appreciate all who have sworn to uphold our constitution. Newcomers, some say we have some pretty strong differences among us, and, well—subtlety is not always one of our strong points. But we try to keep things friendly and civil, and we’ve been known to actually succeed.I used to wonder if the occasionally rough edges of politics were unique here under the Great North Star. But I ventured out a bit this past year, and I tell you that, as partisan quarrels go, ours really aren’t so bad. At our best, we are forthright in our opinions, charitable in our judgments and fair just like the people who hired us to work for them.Today, when challenges may seem as high as Mt. McKinley, and change as constant as the mighty Yukon flows, and political events send shockwaves through our foundation like the ’64 quake—what do Alaskans do? We climb Denali, we forge the river, we rebuild a stronger foundation on higher ground. When it matters most, lesser differences fall away. Just like family, Alaskans unite.It was this kind of determined action that turned the northland wilds into a territory, a territory into a state, and that state, across 50 years, into a land of industry, opportunity, and enduring beauty. And now that perseverance is needed again, as we go through a time of testing for our country—a time of economic worry for many Alaskans—a time of challenge to the wisdom and resolve of state government.Governor Wally Hickel said he feared more than any economic depression—a depression of the spirit. Alaska, it’s time we revive the optimistic, pioneering spirit that our founding mothers and fathers birthed in our State Constitution! As we celebrate statehood—let that spirit rise now, and our actions correspond as our founders intended.See, we have that choice, how to respond to circumstances around us. As public servants, will we draw from a servant’s heart the resolve to put pettiness and power struggles aside and work together for the good of the people? We have the choice. I speak for the entire Palin/Parnell Administration when I declare we choose optimism and collaboration and hard work to get the job done.It starts with a frank assessment of our economy and our budget. We have natural advantages to defer some effects of the global recession. Our banks have good liquidity, our credit market is relatively strong, home foreclosures are lowest in the nation. That’s the upside of a regional economy. The reverse side, our unemployment rate is about the national average—over seven percent, which means thousands of Alaskans need jobs. And when our budget is 90 percent reliant on the value of energy resources, there are consequences.Two years ago at this podium, I urged spending restraint. I asked that billions of surplus funds be deposited in state savings. This struck me as a simple precaution against, as I described it, massive single-year cuts down the road, if and when we faced tougher times. You legislators agreed, so we can now meet our challenge in a stronger position.And you understood the challenge is not just to think fast and change plans when the price of oil suddenly falls, affecting revenue by billions of dollars. The challenge is to follow a consistent plan despite inconsistent prices.With prudence, you built our reserves—that was good planning. This national economic downturn that’s spread to the energy market—it found us prepared. And that’s more than many states can say about their financial situation.When oil prices and state revenue are on the rise, as was the case, there’s temptation to assume it’ll go on rising forever, and to spend accordingly. Since prices fell, there may be an equal temptation to draw heavily on reserves or, for some, to be tempted to tap the permanent fund earnings or tax our hardworking families.No. With the budget, the aim is to keep our economy on a steady, confident course. The aim is—with discipline—we protect our reserves and promote economic growth.Now, unless the price of a barrel of oil dramatically increases, soon, we’re looking at a potential revenue shortfall in excess of a billion dollars this year. So with a close eye on price, we need to be willing to curtail spending as needed. If there’s a shortfall, there are options. It’ll take a cooperative spirit all around to see us through the uncertainty.I had proposed we start with an overall reduction of seven percent from last year’s expenditures. This is a real reduction, not just a reduction in the rate of spending increases—as cuts are often defined elsewhere. That’s transparency in budgeting—just as the public saw when we put the state’s checkbook online. We stand ready to work with lawmakers—who hold the purse strings—to amend the budget, as we receive revenue updates in weeks ahead.Last year, we all expected another surplus. But even then, with record high prices, I chose prudence and directed state commissioners to cut millions in operating costs.  Finding efficiencies even during times of plenty—that’s common sense fiscal responsibility.  Now, obviously, circumstances have changed that even international seasoned oil experts could not predict, requiring us now to adjust even more. Therefore, I am implementing a hiring freeze, exempting public safety, and I am restricting non-essential purchases. These actions reduce the draw on savings as we monitor revenue for the rest of 2009.For too long, Alaska’s economy has struggled with fluctuating revenue due to global commodity prices.  In a volatile economy, numbers are not fixed, but principles are. We’ve followed the same principles from the start of this administration: fiscal discipline, limited government, and responsible stewardship.At a time when other state legislatures are staring at multi-billion-dollar deficits, and when our federal government proposes a deficit in excess of a trillion dollars this year alone, we have all the cautionary examples we need in the virtues of living within our means. With less revenue, we have an obligation to spend less money.With our share of federal funds and Congress’ stimulus package, our obligation is equally clear: we must ensure these public funds serve vital needs—as is the case of infrastructure for our gas pipeline, needed by the nation; and the Kodiak Launch Facility, adding to national defense. President Obama pledged not to let this stimulus package devolve into the past familiar scene of politicians lining up for obscure earmarks. This is reform at work.Thankfully, in the state, these past couple of years we’ve allocated billions for roads, ports, schools, and other vital public works. That money hits the streets and grows the economy this year—so the private sector creates, and we keep, many thousands of good Alaskan jobs through this.  We can stay on that path of investment in growth with continued support for essential construction projects that will—literally—build this state.Now, we can’t buy into the notion that for government to serve better, it must always spend more. Reductions we support are a chance to show the true measure in public policy. Simply increasing budgets every year, a common government practice, is no guarantee of success. More often, it’s an incentive to failure. Good public policy is accountable for results, and focused on critical priorities.We promised public education reform—so schools can plan ahead, and bureaucracies do not smother a school’s creativity or a student’s aspiration. We now take the next step in our three-year education plan—to offer every young Alaskan—rural and urban—the opportunity to learn and work and succeed in the world. We’ll fully forward-fund all our school districts with more than a billion dollars—that’s more than 21 percent of General Fund expenditures. Education is that high a priority. We’ll focus on early learning, vo-tech and workforce development, an enhanced University, streamlined operations, we’ll hold schools accountable, and we’ll encourage opportunities for students with special needs.One of the great privileges given to me last year was the chance to be a witness for the truth that every child has value; to say to special needs children that they are beautiful and loved. And needed. We learn more from them than they from us. Across America, a great change is coming in public policy affecting these children, and Alaska can lead the way. This is a part of the culture of life where every child is cherished and protected.In this chamber, we share a commitment to serious health-care reform. We’ve learned from experience that all the answers do not come from Washington. When Congress turns to health-care reform this year, we look to our delegation to make the case for greater competition, more private sector choices, and less litigation in the health-care market. But we’re not going to wait. Here, reform can move forward without delay.I look forward to working with you on adjustments to kid’s health insurance. We’ll fund more early screening – for example, for autism—because early detection makes all the difference. We’ll focus on preventing disease and promoting healthy living. I’ll ask that physical education be incorporated into daily school schedules, too.We have alarming levels of heart disease, diabetes, childhood obesity—and all of these maladies are on the rise. Now, I won’t stand here and lecture—for very long—but health care reform on an individual basis is often just this simple: we could save a lot of money, and a lot of grief, by making smarter choices.  It starts by ending destructive habits, and beginning healthy habits in eating and exercise. In my case, it’s hard to slack when you have the ever-present example of an Iron Dogger nearby. But many of us could use a little more time in our great outdoors—and when you live in the Great Land, there’s no excuse.Protecting good health is largely a matter of personal responsibility, but government policy can help. Our new Alaska Health Care Commission will recommend changes that affect the well-being of Alaskans far into the future. So, a healthier Alaska via personal responsibility, and subsisting more on our pure and plentiful Alaskan food sources! It’s why we protect our waters and soils from pollutants, and it’s a reason we manage our wildlife for abundance.To ensure this, we’ve successfully brought the Habitat Division back into Fish and Game, as I promised. Our biologists have protected game by eliminating predators from calving grounds and we’ll further protect herds, some of which are at precariously low levels of abundance—thus ultimately promoting the population growth of every species.We’re building viable personal use and commercial fisheries in some of the most controversial and complex fisheries in the world, dealing with half a dozen foreign countries, including Japan, Russia and Canada. We’re establishing sustainable seafood stocks, and limiting salmon bycatch in the trawl fishery. We’ve increased research on salmon runs, and we’re building new hatcheries for vibrant industry.As the largest and only Arctic state, we’re studying climate-change through our DEC-led subcabinet. And we’re suing the federal government for misusing the Endangered Species Act. There is an attempt there to use the ESA to impose environmental policies that should be debated and approved legislatively, not by court order or bureaucratic decree. Alaskans have shown through our protective laws that we’re willing and able to protect our magnificent wildlife, while developing our God-given resources, by using conservation laws as they were intended. We’ll challenge abuse of federal law when it’s used just to lock up Alaska.Vital projects now underway show how much science and technology have improved in a generation, greatly reducing risk to the environment. Continued work in Cook Inlet and on the North Slope, new drilling at Nikaitchug, new exploration in NPRA—these projects and more will be carried out with the safest methods. My administration has dramatically ramped up oversight. We demand the highest standards of stewardship and corporate responsibility, because we want to pass on this Alaska that we cherish to our children and grandchildren and beyond.And just as we strive to keep our environment safe, we’re dedicated to keeping Alaskans safe. We’ve finally filled vacant trooper positions this fall and we have several innovative initiatives moving, like a Highway Patrol Bureau focused on road safety and DUI enforcement. And I’m excited about the Troop to Trooper program, which offers our National Guard hometown heroes careers in law enforcement.These priorities should be a powerful incentive to think clearly and act decisively—not politically —in pursuit of funding them with our next economic lifeline: the gasline. Without revenues from developing clean natural gas, priorities can’t be funded, and we will deplete reserves within a decade. Working together, we’re developing a 10-year plan to keep a healthy balance in the Constitutional Budget Reserve. We’re laying up stores, until strong revenue comes in with the flow of natural gas to feed hungry markets here and outside.Unfortunately, some focus only on potential obstacles when they discuss projects like the gasline: the giants in the land preventing us from gathering fruit. But as I recall, we’ve already slain a few giants. Remember TAPS 30-some years ago? Alaskans were told the oil line was impossible. And then, all those years when this capitol was filled with talk about a $40 billion gasline, but that’s all it ever amounted to—talk, and closed door deals? Working with you, we shook things up, and passed Ethics Reform and AGIA and ACES. By inviting the private sector to compete for the right to tap our resources, we now have two major efforts underway to commercialize gas—without surrendering Alaska’s sovereignty.The big line will be the work of years. Last month we took another step closer to steel pipe when we signed the license with TransCanada-Alaska. To further develop, we’re commissioning preliminary work on a road to Umiat, and pursuing a road to Nome. We need access to our resources. Alaskans—especially in our smaller communities, the heartbeat of Alaska, with truly so much potential—we need jobs for income and achievement. Responsible resource development—including drilling, mining, timber and tourism—means more jobs, instead of more government.Now with the big line, every enterprise—every great thing worth doing—involves challenges. But we can be confident in this enterprise because it’s founded on the fundamental interests of our state and nation. America needs energy: affordable, abundant and secure. With international conflicts, war, and environmental concerns, laws and markets seek safe, clean energy, and that’s what we offer. The last president supported a gasline, and so does the new president. Because even the most promising renewable energy sources are years from general use, between then and now, we need a clean interim fuel to power our grid and heat our homes. Natural gas is ideal.In Alaska, all roads lead—well, really we only have the one, North—but it leads to the North Slope, and to the central importance of our North American gasline. America’s security, Alaska’s revenue, Alaskan careers, affordable fuel, even our ability to finally diversify our economy—all these hinge on the success of this great undertaking. I assure you: The line will be built—gas will flow—Alaska will succeed.Ironically, our people are blessed with owning the richest natural resources in the country; here we’re getting ready to flow four-and-a-half billion cubic feet of gas every day in a huge line; yet we’ve been more vulnerable than other Americans to every rise and fall in energy prices. Even though we own the resources. The solution for our state is much the same as for the rest of our nation—only the source is ours and much closer to us, so delivery can come sooner. We’re facilitating a smaller, in-state gasline with legislation we’ll hand you next month. My goal for this in-state line is completion in five years. It will carry 460-million cubic feet of gas every day to energize Alaska.Previously, we’ve relied on a diminishing gas supply from Cook Inlet, and expensive diesel, and a mix of government subsidies, and not enough conservation—but that is not sustainable. And it shouldn’t take another spike in energy costs to stir us into action. Alaska will help achieve energy independence and security for our country, and we can lead with a long-needed energy plan for America. But let us begin with energy security for ourselves.This includes meeting my goal of generating 50 percent of our electric power with renewable sources. That’s an unprecedented policy across the U.S, but we’re the state that can do it with our abundant renewables, and with Alaskan ingenuity.In our energy plan, for the first time, Alaskans will see cooperation among our utilities. We’ll introduce legislation creating the joint utility corporation to finally accomplish this. No more fractured efforts to generate power along the Railbelt via so many different utilities, headed in so many different directions. We will have coordinated power generation that will finally make sense for consumers.Energy is key. Governor Hickel spoke of the undeniable tie-in between energy and poverty, energy and peace and life. He said, “Our answers begin with energy. Freedom depends on it, so does hope.”For goals of hope, opportunity, and self-sufficiency, government is not the answer, but government can help with energy challenges. In villages, our weatherization programs provide jobs and reduce the cost of living. We continue to support bulk fuel purchases, PCE, power plant upgrades and many projects that foster opportunities and self-sufficiency. We’ve got to row together as one crew—that’s the only way to reach these goals.Now, we need more oil in the pipeline, too. So we strictly enforce state laws and contracts with oil companies. We’ll hold them accountable with those contracted commitments they signed, to develop our resources—as we are expected to keep our word to them. Our reformed oil production formula, ACES, helps them with strong incentives to keep capital re-invested, and it’s working with new developments, as DNR just announced a banner year for new companies entering our competitive oil and gas arena.Alaska, there will come a day when our success is not measured in barrels. The goal is multiplicity—an economy made strong by a wealth of petroleum, but no longer solely dependent on it. And again, the test of leadership is to be prepared. We need a plan. Business leaders, local officials, and other stakeholders, we all agree for our economic future, we need this. Like the saying, “Fail to plan? Then you plan to fail.” To that end, I issued an administrative order this week calling for the state’s first comprehensive economic strategy.Like our unprecedented energy plan rolled out this month, the Alaska Legacy Plan is the first of its kind. It will determine practical strategies to implement today and for the next 50 years. In the past, organizations have studied our strengths and weaknesses. They offered generalized suggestions for change. That’s good, we’ll utilize that. We propose a strategic action plan for private sector and government to stimulate and diversify the economy. We’ll need participation and common sense from those who make this economy run—namely, the small-business owners who do the hard work—they create jobs. That’s where the best ideas are.This will be the road map for activities and investments, to grow us strong, here in the Great Land of plenty. With our ideal, strategic position on the globe as the air-crossroads of the world; with our massive size, with stores of potential, with our spirit, with our people—together we will plot the course.I have confidence in Alaskans, in their judgment and groundedness. Even more so after the journey I completed on November 4th. I learned more about fighting the good fight, facing long odds, the need to protect family—my own and our Alaska family—and putting Country First even when voters put you second. Not unlike Alaska’s journey.When I took my oath of office to serve as your Governor, remember, I swore to steadfastly and doggedly guard the interests of this great state like a grizzly with cubs, as a mother naturally guards her own. Alaska, as a statewide family, we’ve got to fight for each other, not against and not let external, sensationalized distractions draw us off course.As an exciting year of unpredictable change begins, we, too, have our work cut out for us. And we’re all in this together. Just like our musk ox, they circle up to protect their future when they are challenged. We’ve got to do the same. So now, united, protecting and progressing under the great North Star, let’s get to work.Thank you. God bless.

He’d better get used to this

Politico‘s Johnathan Martin and Carrie Budoff Brown report,

President Barack Obama made a surprise visit to the White House press corps Thursday night, but got agitated when he was faced with a substantive question.Asked how he could reconcile a strict ban on lobbyists in his administration with a deputy defense secretary nominee who lobbied for Raytheon, Obama interrupted with a knowing smile on his face.”Ahh, see,” he said, “I came down here to visit. See this is what happens. I can’t end up visiting with you guys and shaking hands if I’m going to get grilled every time I come down here.”Pressed further by the Politico reporter about his Pentagon nominee, William J. Lynn III, Obama turned more serious, putting his hand on the reporter’s shoulder and staring him in the eye.”Alright, come on” he said, with obvious irritation in his voice. “We will be having a press conference at which time you can feel free to [ask] questions. Right now, I just wanted to say hello and introduce myself to you guys—that’s all I was trying to do.”

Candidate Obama got away with treating the media like that; President Obama, though, is going to find that that sort of behavior isn’t going to wear well.  If he doesn’t want to make enemies of the media, he’d best get used to answering their questions.HT:  The Weekly Standard

Good news on the tech front

I know a couple folks who’ve been playing around with the Windows 7 beta, and everyone seems to agree:  even as a beta, it mops the floor with Vista.  Win 7 appears to be to Vista as 98 was to 95—namely, a giant bug fix, fine-tune and cleanup; and it looks like Microsoft is doing a good job of that.  Perhaps the best news is that

Windows 7 also cuts down on annoying warnings and nag screens. Microsoft notifications have been consolidated in a single icon at the right of the taskbar, and you can now decide under what circumstances Windows will warn you before taking certain actions.

Unless, of course, it’s this:

In my tests, even the beta version of Windows 7 was dramatically faster than Vista at such tasks as starting up the computer, waking it from sleep and launching programs. . . . Windows 7 is also likely to run well on much more modest hardware configurations than Vista needed.

That said, neither of these things is likely to draw the most attention; the big notices will be reserved for its big new feature:

The flashiest departure in Windows 7, and one that may eventually redefine how people use computers, is its multitouch screen navigation. Best known on Apple’s iPhone, this system allows you to use your fingers to directly reposition, resize, and flip through objects on a screen, such as windows and photos. It is smart enough to distinguish between various gestures and combinations of fingers. I haven’t been able to test this feature extensively yet, because it requires a new kind of touch-sensitive screen that my laptops lack.

For my part, I don’t care about that (right now, at least); I’ll just be happy to have an OS that doesn’t silt up so fast, and isn’t stubbornly determined to nag me to death.

The politics of personal destruction, intra-GOP edition

When a couple McCain campaign staffers went to war on Sarah Palin last fall, trying to make her the implausible scapegoat for their candidate’s loss, one obvious motive was to shift the blame for the loss away from their own (dismal) performance.  Beyond that, there were rumors that the Romney camp was behind it in an effort to help Mitt Romney’s chances to win the GOP’s presidential nomination in 2012.  It quickly became clear, however, that Nicolle Wallace, a former CBS executive whom the McCain campaign made Gov. Palin’s chief handler (and who, as such, was responsible for most of the decisions that hurt Gov. Palin), was the primary bad actor; at that point, the Romney theory fell by the wayside, because Wallace wasn’t allied with the Romney camp.  She had been, however, an aide to George W. Bush and Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, which prompted the suggestion that the deep motive behind her attempt to smear Gov. Palin was in fact to clear the decks for Jeb Bush to run for President.Now, we have an idea why.  Judging from her column yesterday, Wallace may be a Republican but she’s no conservative; rather, she seems pretty clearly to be an Establishment Republican who is opposed to any sort of conservative resurgence within the GOP.  She worked for the Bushes, who are the First Family of the oldline GOP Establishment if anyone is, and then went to work for John McCain, who was (from the Establishment perspective) President Bush’s logical successor despite the differences between the two men; but when Sen. McCain named an actual conservative as his running mate—and an appealing, charismatic, pathbreaking conservative at that—that obviously posed her a problem.  Erick Erickson of RedState writes about Wallace,

We don’t know why she behaved as she did other than to save her own skin at the expense of a decent women maligned by the press and handled incompetently by the McCain campaign.

I agree that we can’t know for sure; but I do wonder, given what we do know, if at some level Wallace was sabotaging Gov. Palin.  I don’t say that she was doing so consciously—but given that Gov. Palin clearly represented a threat to Wallace’s own political views and the wing of the party with which she has identified herself, she may well have done so subconsciously.  At the very least, and particularly given the remarkably poor way in which she assisted the Governor, she clearly was not motivated to do her best work on Gov. Palin’s behalf.  When one considers how she acted once she was free to say whatever she wanted about Gov. Palin, however, the possibility that her sabotage may have been at least semi-deliberate (an effort to play down the Governor and thus hurt her without hurting Sen. McCain’s campaign) cannot be ruled out.Whether Gov. Jeb Bush will in fact jump into the 2012 presidential race, I have no idea; but if he does, regardless of attempts to hatchet down Gov. Palin or anyone else, I can’t imagine him winning the nomination.  Had things played out differently, I think he might have been a fine president—he was a good governor in Florida, and I certainly would have preferred him to his brother—but not now; the GOP needs to turn away from its establishment candidates and back to conservatism.  It also needs to return to its Reaganite roots in another way:  it needs to throw overboard the people who think it’s appropriate to hatchet down fellow Republicans for political gain.  Like Nicolle Wallace.

Channeling Dubya, Part II

Even Jon Stewart has noticed:
.cc_box a:hover .cc_home{background:url(‘http://www.comedycentral.com/comedycentral/video/assets/syndicated-logo-over.png’) !important;}.cc_links a{color:#b9b9b9;text-decoration:none;}.cc_show a{color:#707070;text-decoration:none;}.cc_title a{color:#868686;text-decoration:none;}.cc_links a:hover{color:#67bee2;text-decoration:underline;}

As John Hinderaker sums it up, “I think a great many liberals are hanging on to the idea that they can trust Obama because he is a liar and doesn’t mean what he says. Time will tell whether that interpretation is correct or not. In the meantime, it doesn’t speak very well of either Obama or his supporters on the Left.”

The change we’ve been waiting for?

Yesterday, Barack Obama had some fine words for the people he’s chosen to serve in his administration.  No surprise there; Barack Obama always has fine words.  I particularly appreciate this:

The way to make government responsible is to hold it accountable. And the way to make government accountable is make it transparent so that the American people can know exactly what decisions are being made, how they’re being made, and whether their interests are being well served.The directives I am giving my administration today on how to interpret the Freedom of Information Act will do just that. For a long time now, there’s been too much secrecy in this city. The old rules said that if there was a defensible argument for not disclosing something to the American people, then it should not be disclosed. That era is now over. Starting today, every agency and department should know that this administration stands on the side not of those who seek to withhold information but those who seek to make it known. . . .Let me say it as simply as I can: Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency.

Fine words, indeed, and a noble aim—but fine words only mean something if people take them seriously, and a noble aim is little but moonbeams if not pursued with determination.  So the question is, how are we seeing this realized?  The answer, unfortunately, is that President Obama’s senior appointees have already begun to betray their boss on this point.  Timothy Geithner, Treasury Secretary-designee, first offered the Senate dubious excuses for his failure to pay his taxes, then finally seems to have lied to them about it; Eric Holder, meanwhile, the nominee for Attorney General, has already been caught in a bald-faced lie.  Whatever your opinion about President Obama’s ability to deliver the change he promised, I think we can all agree this isn’t it.

Reality has entered the arena

Juan Williams has an excellent piece in the Wall Street Journal titled, “Judge Obama on Performance Alone,” calling on the media to start treating President Obama fairly instead of favorably.  Williams writes,

It is neither overweening emotion nor partisanship to see King’s moral universe bending toward justice in the act of the first non-white man taking the oath of the presidency. But now that this moment has arrived, there is a question: How shall we judge our new leader?If his presidency is to represent the full power of the idea that black Americans are just like everyone else—fully human and fully capable of intellect, courage and patriotism—then Barack Obama has to be subject to the same rough and tumble of political criticism experienced by his predecessors. To treat the first black president as if he is a fragile flower is certain to hobble him. It is also to waste a tremendous opportunity for improving race relations by doing away with stereotypes and seeing the potential in all Americans.Yet there is fear, especially among black people, that criticism of him or any of his failures might be twisted into evidence that people of color cannot effectively lead. That amounts to wasting time and energy reacting to hateful stereotypes. It also leads to treating all criticism of Mr. Obama, whether legitimate, wrong-headed or even mean-spirited, as racist.This is patronizing. Worse, it carries an implicit presumption of inferiority. Every American president must be held to the highest standard. No president of any color should be given a free pass for screw-ups, lies or failure to keep a promise. . . .To allow criticism of Mr. Obama only behind closed doors does no honor to the dreams and prayers of generations past: that race be put aside, and all people be judged honestly, openly, and on the basis of their performance.President Obama deserves no less.

Williams is right, and his point is a critically important one—even more important, perhaps, than he contends.  The sort of “affectionate if not fawning treatment from the American media” that Senator Obama received during the campaign was helpful to him as a candidate, because as a candidate he was insulated from the broader reality of the American situation.  He didn’t have to put anything on the line to deal with the challenges this country faces, nor did he have to accept responsibility for anything that went wrong, because he wasn’t in the arena where those challenges are actually faced—that fight belonged to President Bush, leaving Senator Obama free to critique from the stands without having to deal with it himself.  He had a different campaign to fight, one in which perception is what matters most, and the adulation of the media could affect that in meaningful ways to his benefit.Now, however, the situation is very different; it is now President Obama’s task to be “the man in the arena,” and he is no longer free merely to comment, criticize, and suggest—he must act, and his actions will have direct and significant consequences.  As Jennifer Rubin writes,

The economy will either improve or it won’t. President Obama will either control and focus the multiple voices in his administration and prevent too many cooks from spoiling the soup (or deadlocking the administration) or he won’t. And he will either continue George W. Bush’s record of post-9-11 U.S. safety and post-surge progress, or he won’t. Those events can only be spun so much. But unemployment rates, Dow Jones averages, al Qaeda terrorists and even Congress don’t much care whether he is the embodiment of the mainstream media’s hopes and dreams.In the end, what matters most is what the President does—and what results he achieves.

This is truth, and it means that from here on out, the media aren’t really going to be able to do Barack Obama any favors; they can do a lot to destroy a president, as they did with George W. Bush, by skewing their reporting toward bad news and spinning things in negative ways, but they can’t create good news that isn’t there, and they can’t keep bad news from getting out.  No matter how hard they try, “the MSM has to get around to reporting what everyone else knows to be the case sooner or later (as they did on Iraq).”  They can only delay that point—they cannot keep it from arriving.That being the case, the one real effect they could have by continuing to fawn over Barack Obama is to foster and feed a feeling of overconfidence in the White House—which couldn’t possibly be good for the president or his administration, and could quite possibly be fatal.  Far better for them to start asking the tough questions and digging out the hidden stories now, when there’s much less on the line.  I don’t expect them to attack President Obama the way they attacked President Bush—indeed, I’m glad they won’t; what they did to our 43rd president was dishonorable and repulsive, and I would not care to see it repeated to anyone—but they need to get back to being what they claim to be, “a proud, adversarial press speaking truth about a powerful politician and offering impartial accounts of his actions.”  As Juan Williams says, President Obama deserves no less.