Obama’s visit to Sweden Wednesday was the first bilateral meeting of a U.S. president to Sweden.
“The President was defensive” was the going meme this morning on the allegedly liberal MSNBC, as the pundits carried their “red line” narrative to its natural conclusion. Everyone repeated it, and then conservative from the National Review referred to “The President’s quagmire”, which sounds eerily like “The President’s scandals” of this summer that turned out to be non-scandals. Well, non-scandals only if we excuse yet again the Republican stenographers that our press have become.
President Barack Obama and Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt give a joint news conference in Stockholm, Sweden Wednesday morning, in which the President deftly answered complicated questions with complex nuance. This should have reminded those suffering from Post Traumatic Bush Disorder that Obama is not Bush and that this president expects vigorous intellectual debate. It should have invited a serious discussion of the issues.
To get more stories like this, subscribe to our newsletter The Daily.
But for those who spent the Bush years (hello, corporate media) trailing W around like lost puppy dogs, happily reporting on his WMD and making excuses for him when he disappeared during times of great crisis, today was yet another opportunity to pose as a real fourth estate.
No, not a tough fourth estate, as evinced by journalists in Sweden who asked pointed, important questions of the President; the American brand of corporate fourth estate that can only be BMC when a Democrat is in the White House because Democrats won’t deregulate their corporate owners, so they use every Democratic presidency as the time to brush up on their scandal mongering skills.
From this “fourth estate” we get memes like “The President is defensive.” This meme means nothing, it’s just another scandalicious way of keeping viewers tuned in. The President might go down! He’s losing! Stay tuned!
When the President said, “My credibility not on the line; the international community’s credibility is on the line,” and pointedly asked, “Would the United States believe this was a red line no matter who was president?” he was “defensive”.
Obama also pointed out, “Congress set a red line.” He was probably referring to a 1997 resolution regarding Syria and the possession and use of weapons of mass destruction. That, too, was “defensive”, like you get “defensive” when you smack a bully back or when you try to remind the press of something they already know but are choosing to forget. “Defensive” as in, can we please focus on the facts of this issue instead of me as the main character of your cheap tv show.
“Defensive” as the pundits used it this morning is right up there with “over sensitive”.
Obama wasn’t “defensive”; he was angry and fed up. He was taking a dig at the press, who never forgive him for not doing the DC thing, sticking it to him to make up for their humiliating show during the Bush years.
He was irritated over this ridiculous “red line” narrative that the press co-opted from Republicans days ago, as if no President had ever spoken of a red line before. (By the way, today’s “defensive” was Sunday’s “red line” — agreed upon narrative to be repeated ad nauseam.) He was angry that some House Republicans are so immature that they can’t stop seeing Syria through their Obama Opposition Disorder lens.
He was angry that we can’t discuss a serious issue rationally, and instead have to reduce everything to memes and finger pointing. Who cares who set the red line? Are we children? Why doesn’t the press ask Congress why they can’t deal with any issue great or small without reacting to their toxic hatred of this President? Can we grow up- even a little?
Why aren’t we discussing the issue of expanded presidential powers and Obama retracting them, which is really the issue of this crisis, and is the real reason why some Republicans won’t get on board.
The corporate American press is failing us right now, pre-Syria, in the very same way as they did in the lead up to Iraq. There’s no serious discussion; instead they are turning it into a drama where the main character has his “red line” at stake, which is actually his entire presidency! gasp — and instead of pulling it out, he’s made a quagmire. Tune in tomorrow when As the Red Line Turns continues.
It’s good that the press aren’t afraid of Obama as they were Bush. They shouldn’t be afraid. But this isn’t about them. This is about trying to get to the truth and the truth is not being serviced when the press is too busy reacting to their previous failures and Obama’s refusal to do the cocktail circuit.
This is not about Obama and his red line or his alleged defensiveness. This is about whether or not we agree that chemical weapons are a red line for us all, whether or not there is evidence of said chemical weapons, and if we decide to strike, what are the parameters and what will the options be if it doesn’t work. This is about who is not on board with us, and why. This is about hearing all sides of this debate instead of getting distracted by emotional narratives like “They hate us for our freedoms” or “Obama’s defensiveness”.
We deserve a press that will ask tough questions of all leaders and lawmakers. We deserve to be having a real debate about Syria and this is not it. We’re not asking for “liberal” news, we’re asking for actual news.
Listen to Sarah on the PoliticusUSA Pod on The Daily newsletter podcast here.
Sarah has been credentialed to cover President Barack Obama, then VP Joe Biden, 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, and exclusively interviewed Speaker Nancy Pelosi multiple times and exclusively covered her first home appearance after the first impeachment of then President Donald Trump.
Sarah is two-time Telly award winning video producer and a member of the Society of Professional Journalists.
Connect with Sarah on Post, Mastodon @PoliticusSarah@Journa.Host, & Twitter.
