[guest post by Dana]
How pathetic to see Jeh Johnson so easily sink to such a low level of bullshit in an effort to defend President Obama from criticism that he hasn’t
visited made a flyover of flood-ravaged Louisiana to see the devastation firsthand:
As I said, the president can’t be everywhere. I know he has a very busy schedule this fall and in the coming days, and, um, he is closely monitoring the situation. Uh, when you’re the chief executive of the entire U.S. government, uh, you can’t be everywhere, uh, including places you would like to be.
Oh for f*** sake, just say it already: President Obama is precisely where he wants to be, and doing exactly what he wants to do. Period. He is an adult who made the decision to live out his priorities this week. And he doesn’t seem to have a problem showing us that his priorities are playing golf and eating in expensive restaurants with the one-percenters. So why infantalize him and make excuses for the grown man that a majority of Americans twice deemed mature and responsible enough to become the President of the United States? What, he’s a child now and needs to be treated as such? Verbally debasing oneself to protect this man-child from criticism only speaks to the fact that the president, of his own free-will, has indeed, and yet again, stepped in it. Hysterically, it took a visit by Donald Trump to compel the White House to announce the president would be making his own visit to the state next week. Anyway, it’s the president’s own damn fault that the optics of HIS decisions only reinforce his incredibly tone-deaf arrogance and self-centeredness. At the very least, he could have made a symbolic gesture of sympathy toward suffering Louisianans by, I don’t know, putting up the clubs for the week. But he didn’t. Or he could have interrupted his vacation and returned to Washington. But he didn’t. He wanted to play instead. Play golf, that is… But, please, can we let the adult who has the title of President of the United States assume responsibility for his OWN
actions inaction. After all, he just wants to eat his waffles:
Last night, I pointed out the lack of headline coverage in the Washington Post and New York Times regarding Trump’s visit to Louisiana. In such media outlets, all things Trump are typically given top billing. And it’s typically negative because Trump just keeps giving the media so much to work with. I see that Jim Geraghty expands on this, reminding us about Big Media’s litmus test of usefulness, administered when national tragedies and disasters occur:
If you view the national news media, based in New York, Washington, Los Angeles and a handful of other cities, as way too monolithic in its political views and driven by conscious and subconscious agendas, the half-hearted-at-best interest in these stories isn’t that hard to explain. These stories aren’t easily used to advance the narrative that Republicans are bad and Democrats are good.
If a terrible natural disaster in Louisiana can be blamed on a Republican president, then it’s one of the biggest stories of the decade. If the lack of a public statement on a Louisiana disaster during a presidential vacation might reflect badly on a Democratic president, it’s best to treat the flood as a “page A4″ story, check-the-box journalism.
If there really is a giant and widening cultural gap between America’s elites and the rest of the citizenry in “flyover country,” how much of it is driven by narrative-minded journalism? If you die in a particular way that can advance the Democrats’ legislative agenda, your death is going to be an enormously big deal. If the circumstances of your death are politically inconvenient to the Left – Brian Terry or the Benghazi four or those who died on the waiting list for the VA — there are no greater lessons to be learned or need for further action; it’s just an unfortunate set of circumstances. One set of citizens are in the picture; one set of citizens on the periphery get cropped out. It just doesn’t fit the picture that someone wants to create.