Last week, I wrote about President Obama having a tough end of spring, beginning of summer. I don’t usually do sequels, but if anything blog-worthy has leaped out at me over the past week, it is that there has continued to be a steady stream of “more of the same.” In this post I will highlight just a couple of examples; as in the gentlemen referenced in the Title above.
First, Artur Davis is a former Democratic member of the U.S. House of Representatives. He held the seat in Alabama’s 7th Congressional District, from 2003-2011, and ran unsuccessfully in the state’s Gubernatorial Primary in 2010.
The May 29th edition of TheFix, a Washington Post Blog by Chris Cillizza, indicates Davis wrote on his Web site, “If I were to run, it would be as a Republican, and I am in the process of changing my registration from Alabama to Virginia, a development which likely does represent a closing of one chapter and perhaps the opening of another.”
The former Congressman has now, in effect, moved 180 degrees away from that pivotal moment in 2008. He has renounced support for President Obama, and indicated he is ditching the Democratic Party in favor of the GOP.
In an on-air interview featured on CNN’s The Situation Room, this past Monday, Davis told host Wolf Blitzer, his principal reasons for supporting then Senator Obama were that he thought:
·
Obama, as President, would foster a significant
improvement in race relations
·
He (Obama) would move the Democratic Party further toward the center.
Ultimately, he dropped his
support for the President because of what
he termed broken campaign promises. He
added, "I think the Obama
administration has candidly gone too far to the left. You can raise all kinds
of questions on whether that's good politics or not. Obviously the election will determine
that."
In the interview with Blitzer, Davis Davis
I don’t claim to have a
clear window into the definitive
research on whether this assertion
reflects an accurate depiction of
life on the ground in 2012. If, however it does amount to the irreducible truth, one can rightfully
presume that POTUS is in for an exceptionally rigorous and challenging election fight over the course of the next
four and a half months. Moreover, the
prospect is certainly strong, if not likely, that the President is in stark jeopardy of being relegated to one term.
Second, last
Friday, Neil Munro made himself next in line as one of the men who has
taken great pains to distinguish themselves as part of a growing litany of
individuals who seek/find honor in heckling and/or publicly attacking President Obama. This latest incident
took place Friday afternoon in the Rose Garden at the White House as President
Obama made an announcement unveiling a new immigration policy.
Munro, works
for an organization named The Daily Caller,
a news and opinion website based in Washington , DC
On Friday afternoon, as the President
described his new policy, Mr. Munro
interrupted him by asking why he favored foreigners over American workers. The President continued speaking, eventually
indicating to Munro that, in answer to
his question, the policy was the right thing to do for the American people.
In an instant, Munro had completed the self-transformation into conservative icon, while simultaneously catapulting himself to the top of a super select pecking order; Americans
who have launched a direct verbal assault on President Obama, captured in real time by mainstream media. He joins the Southern swagger of Joe Wilson, the South Carolina
Congressman of “You lie” fame,
and the irrepressible Arizona Governor Jan Brewer; she of finger wagging in the President’s grill (face) notoriety. Together, they
form three-quarters of a virtual Mount Rushmore of Obama
bashers.
A number of sources among traditional media viewed the outburst by
Munro as inappropriate, even rude. Be
that as it may, in his own words (defense),
Mr. Munro said of the encounter:
“I timed the question believing the president was closing his remarks, because naturally I have no
intention of interrupting the President
of the United States. I know he rarely takes questions before walking away
from the podium. When I asked the
question as he finished his speech, he turned his back on the many reporters,
and walked away while I and at least one other reporter asked questions.”
Further, in full-throated
support of Munro, described as an
Irish Immigrant, by Tucker Carlson, co-founder
of The Daily Caller, Munro was only doing his job. He said, specifically:
“A reporter’s job is
to ask questions and get answers. Our job is to find out what the federal
government is up to. Politicians often don’t want to tell us. A good reporter
gets the story. We’re proud of Neil Munro.”
Alternately, according to the Washington Post 2012 Election Blog, Sam Donaldson, retired ABCNews correspondent, known for his dogged pursuit tactics while interviewing
Presidents said:
“I never interrupted any
president while he was making a formal presentation of any sort. You don’t do
that, do you?”
Britt Hume, a senior political
analyst for Fox News Tweeted:
"I
never did that in my 8 years at the White House & don't recall anyone else
doing it either."
In taking a long
lens view of this matter, many of those media types who line up on the
political right find Mr. Munro’s
actions logical, defensible, and even necessary. Rush Limbaugh and Lou Dobbs are two
other examples of folks who have praised Munro,
while skewering the President for
their respective roles in this
encounter. Dobbs said Munro did the
right thing, and since the President
took no questions, he had no choice. Limbaugh ridiculed those who chided Munro.
And then there are other views. Munro
framed the rationale for his attack questions as being based on his
belief the President was wrapping up
his comments. Several reporters in close
proximity to Mr. Munro at the time
saw it differently.
BriannaKeilar, of CNN Tweeted:
“I was two
people over from Neil Munro. No one
thought the president was wrapping up. I
give that statement a great big Cow Pie Award.”
ToddZwillich, Washington
“Idea he
mistimed his question isn’t credible. He
purposely interrupted.”
Neil Munro flouted a key rule for White House correspondents: Don’t interrupt the President’s formal
remarks. Munro and the many folks who agree with him argue, publicly anyway,
that the basis for their relentless pushback is predicated upon an earnest
disagreement on matters of policy and
principle.
Frequently, other observers believe there is a
varied agenda on the part of people who routinely and consistently attack President Obama, much of it having
nothing whatsoever to do with policy and
principle. These observers note the
level and depth of antics and tactics that have been deployed against President
Obama exceed, by far, in their extremity, the measures taken against
previous Presidents.
So, the question remains, “Who are Artur Davis and Neil Munro…and Why Does it Matter?“ The answer; Davis
Without question, the economy and employment
matters (including monthly jobs
estimates) will dominate the election
landscape. But the European economy, national security, immigration, Obamacare,
and the perpetually moving target of the compelling interest of Independent voters will also come into
play. Buckle your seat belts; the ride
is going to get bumpy.
I’m done; holla
back!
Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com.
A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information
on a variety of aspects relating to this post,
consult the links below:
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment