The updated graph of President Obama’s learning curve regarding the Presidential practice of gratuitous commentary on the jobs, businesses, and duties of others. Oddly, it looks exactly like the last such graph, and the graph before that…
In the long list of example of President Obama interfering with private decisions, court cases and local matters that the occupant of highest office in the land has an obligation not to meddle in, his comments on the Washington Redskins are among the least annoying. It was a wishy-washy statement, all in all, that he gave to the AP:
“If I were the owner of the team and I knew that there was a name of my team — even if it had a storied history — that was offending a sizable group of people, I’d think about changing it.”
Does anyone doubt that owner of the Washington Redskins, Dan Snyder, hasn’t thought about it? On its face, the statement is petty, but of course, as the President resolutely refuses to learn, everything the President of the United States says, scripted or non-, regarding national policy or local matters, be they about red lines or how victims of gun violence look like his son, the President’s comments are seized upon, blown out of proportion, spun, used as weapons, provocations and ammunition, and generally warp public policy discourse, public opinion and personal and local decision-making.
This is why most Presidents avoid shooting off the Presidential yap about local, commercial and private matters, and those who mistakenly blurt out opinions on inappropriate topics for Presidential commentary learn their lesson and don’t do it again. Not this President. He is incapable of learning this basic rule that all of his predecessors have mastered with ease. He can’t help himself. So now it isn’t enough that Dan Snyder is dealing with an over-hyped team with a young savior at quarterback who can’t quite deliver on all the high expectations; now, thanks to Obama, he has to deal with accusatory questions beginning with, “Now that the President has said that you should change the name….“
“As the first sitting president to speak out against the Washington team name, President Obama’s comments today are historic,” predictably reacted Ray Halbritter, a representative for the Oneida Indian Nation, which has launched a “Change the Mascot” campaign against the team. “The use of such an offensive term has negative consequences for the Native American community when it comes to issues of self-identity and imagery.” It’s historic all right: Obama is the first President in history who lacks such respect for the judiciary, law enforcement, private business, personal choice, and the proper limitations of his office. I’m not going to rehash this endless examples of the political correctness bullying on the Redskins issue yet again….if you want to read my opinion and analysis, read here, or here, or here.
I’m thoroughly sick of Redskins name controversy, frankly, which is exactly what political correctness fanatics and speech bullies count on. In the end, they care so much more about these matters than any rational individual that eventually the sane who have lives and know that there are better ways to spend one’s time than arguing with fools just give up and say, “Fine! We’ll give up and name the team something bland like “the Americans” or “the Home Team” or…well, why don’t you just dictate what the name is, as long as you promise to shut up, for the love of all that’s holy!” That’s how political correctness always wins…that’s why we can’t say “Merry Christmas” or have our kids learn “Adeste Fideles” in school. Fanatics and bullies get their way—especially when the President of the United States is always ready to give them a boost.
If you want to read almost a parody of the anti-Redskins mantra, read Dana Milbank’s lazy, cliche-ridden column here…inspired, naturally, by the President’s kibitzing. Comparing the Redskins nickname to “The New York Niggers” is so hackneyed and intellectually embarrassing that one wonders if Milbank gave any thought to what he wrote at all. People don’t name teams they love after groups they denigrate, you twit—any eleven-year-old knows that. What remains so infuriating about this debate—sick, sick, sick of it!—is that the Redskins-haters keep making arguments that have been thoroughly debunked and disproven over and over again, and they just don’t care. They will bend the team, its owner and its fans to its will, or we will get no peace.
In Milbank’s article, he quotes Lanny Davis, Bill Clinton’s former rationalizer during the Monica storms, now employed by Snyder, who has apparently been hired to disperse the latest round of criticism stirred up with the help of POTUS. More of Davis’s comments are quoted by blogger Erika Johnson: I particularly like Davis saying that “President Obama has better things to worry about…” — Ya think??? She also adds this:
“…if President Obama would care to offer more presidential opinions about the welfare of Native Americans, he might begin by doing more than just paying some annual lip service to the top-down government control that keeps too many Indian reservations in perpetual states of third-world-like poverty.”
Touché! And this nicely points out what is the matter with this President’s constant presumption. He has his own job to do, and there is much that isn’t being done. It is irresponsible, not to mention arrogant and unfair, for him to use his position and power to make the tasks of other Americans—in their jobs, their personal lives, their professional duties—more difficult by using the bully pulpit to snipe from the sidelines.
That wasn’t what Teddy Roosevelt mean by “bully,’ you know. I wonder if President Obama does.
________________________________
Sources: Hot Air, Washington Post 1, 2, 3,CBS
Ethics Alarms 
“He is incapable of learning this basic rule that all of his predecessors have mastered with ease. He can’t help himself.”
I think he’s learned it all too well. These diversions of the media and the American public into trivia keep us from focusing on what’s really important. Maybe we shouldn’t assume this president doesn’t know what he’s doing. He’s sure getting a lot of very destructive things done.
(Of course, it may be his administration or the “vast left-wing conspiracy” that’s getting destructive things done, but he’s certainly the untouchable figurehead for it.)
I think he’s learned it all too well. These diversions of the media and the American public into trivia keep us from focusing on what’s really important. Maybe we shouldn’t assume this president doesn’t know what he’s doing. He’s sure getting a lot of very destructive things done.
************
Yeah, that plus his Narcissism tells him people of the world are clamoring to hear his sage-like wisdom on every subject imaginable.
He likes the sound of his own voice, no doubt, too.
Dan Stewart said it best…
I wonder if all these left-wing activists are racists, lazy, or just ignorant. They go after teams like the Redskins, the Hurons, etc. However, they leave alone teams like the Sooners, the Orangemen, and the Irish. Is it because they aren’t smart enough to know that those are probably worse?
I always thought Syracuse should play Notre Dame every year. They could call it “The Battle of the Boyne”.
I’ve always wondered about a school that proudly named themselves after cheats and thieves.
An old friend and I used to humor each other with mock conspiracy to open a “politically incorrect gift shop.” Together we would daydream about all the offensive stuff we would sell – various merchandise like the pro sports teams do, but with politically incorrect names for each of the teams as the basis for the markings, logos, souvenirs etc. in the inventory. We are both misanthropes, so this kind of humoring was especially delicious to both of us. I am sure, had it ever been overheard by anyone else, our choked-laughter-punctuated chatter would have landed us in jail for hate crimes (and the shop would have been burned down before it opened). My friend, a fellow Virginian (while I lived there) and more educated than I, informed me that the mascot for Virginia Tech, the Hokie, is a castrated turkey. Man, we just could not top that. (Guess it’s gotta go.)
Loathe as I am to say it, i’m willing to give the President a bit of a pass here because the reporter asked the question and he simply responded. This is in contrast to other local news stories in which he deliberately and unnecessarily injected himself into the debate. A wiser, more disciplined, president would have simply declined comment on such a non-presidential topic but, as we know, that’s not in Obama’s nature. When given a chance to spout politically correct platitudes, he simply can’t help himself.
His response should have been something along the lines of “At what point do you think it matters what the President thinks about this? Why are you even asking me about this? Don’t you have anything better to be asking about?”
OH Please Jack.. Every Republican president in my lifetime has stuck his big fat nose into local issues when they had no business doing so.. ARe you willing to call Reagan’s and Nixon’s learning curve FLAT? I didn’t think so.
My favorite big fat nose where it doesn’t belong incident was 1969 when President Nixon attended the Texas Arkansas game, where he went to the Texas lockerroom to present the #1 plaque…. All arranged by the Political Hacks in the Republican Party.. He ignored Penn State undefeated streak and could care less about their OB win over Missouri. What business did he have in influencing the National Championship? Screw Nixon.
How the hell is awarding a trophy the same as publicly opining about something that is none of a President’s fucking business?
The BCS system is violently broken?
Boo hoo. Go cry to the ’97 and ’99 KSU football programs.
Let JJ grasp for straws to find something so he can invoke his favorite “Everybody Does It” rationalization.
No President has opined in legal matters, local law enforcement or private business issues like Obama. Nothing close. No four Presidents. Maybe no ten. Presenting trophies and congratulating winners is ceremony—Nixon didn’t choose who was #1. That’s all you can find? It’s not even in the ballpark!
Some might argue that Lincoln stuck his nose into some local affairs.
What an evil Republican, just as bad as Obama.
Old Rebels die hard.
The more I meditate on it, the more I realize that the Civil War’s roots were one huge legal and constitutional conundrum, even more so than simplistic reading of history. Yet it was right. But wrong. But more right than wrong. With many lasting negative implications. But with several lasting positive implications. But devastating. But self-cleansing.
Saying something about what lies ahead, are you??
Yeah, I don’t think Americans have the wherewithal for forceful defense of their liberty anymore. Our false economy that is so wedded to the Keynesian smokescreen of debt and inflation has too many people tied to personal debt, national debt, and a belief in “easy money”. That in and of itself wouldn’t be a problem if you could rely on modern people to put principle before material comfort. If we had those people, then politicians seeking to reduce spending would be elected in droves. Nope. Our material narcissist culture wouldn’t so much as lift a finger to reverse course since it would involve inevitable sacrifices of convenience and comfort. We’ll just have to wait until nature does it for us and makes it even more painful. I wouldn’t doubt right now, that an average civilian would sign away half his rights as a citizen for a free iPad.
-Cynicus Maximus
Thanks CM, your 9/11:46 pm plus 10/12:47 pm are so good, I am copying and saving them. Somewhere, somehow, mind-melds DO happen.
If secession was legal, then firing on Fort Sumter was an act of war.
If secession was illegal, then firing on Fort Sumter was an act of rebellion.
Please re-read where I said “Civil War’s roots”, not “Civil War’s immediate reason to start shooting”. Like I said, it’s not a simplistic reading of history.
* If we wanted to be that simplistic, then all the Southern state’s seizure of nationally owned property would have qualified as “Acts of War”.
I don’t think Nixon ever mentioned changing the Washington Redskins name…when a government leader of the once most respected country in the world chimes in on this trivial shit versus a balanced budget or cutting wasteful federal spending or even reading the ACA that clearly shows financial doom for all….then screw Obama!
Slightly related: what do you make of this?
It’s willfully ignorant and shows a desire to distort reality to make an invalid argument.
As for Chief Wahoo–yeah, I see the compliant, but I don’t find Beetle Bailey offensive—he’s a cartoon, not a picture of me. The Celtics leprechaun doesn’t represent all Irish. Yogi is a pretty silly looking bear. It’s more of the same.
Well, what about mascots that haven’t stood the test of time, like the Frito Bandito?
What, exactly, is or was wrong with the Frito Bandito??
I mean, those who could have been offended and felt so marginalized as to demand banishments have survived, and are thriving in spite of, Ronald McDonald, the Wienermobile, Get Smart, Gilligan’s Island, All in the Family, Blazing Saddles, Seinfeld, The Office, Simon Cowell, and now Modern Family, and God Knows what else (and what else to come).
Maybe KFC should start advertising that they sell only left wings. Or right wings. Or no wings. Or just call their offerings Barackuisine. (Of course, gotta confirm just exactly what the man eats, first, besides Chili Vanilli.)
You’ve gotta copyright Barackuisine. Or I will totally steal that.
Could Jack claim any rights to that, since it appeared in his blog?
Nonsense. Are Scandinavian people offended by teams called Vikings? It’s how the person hears it that makes it insulting. If it’s heard as insulting it’s insulting to the hearer, but that’s not the speakers problem if he he’s using standard forms of speech not deliberate insults.
As far as the picture goes I’ve seen some pretty insulting pictures of Vikings, but I don’t assume they’re meant to insult me just because I’m Danish.
a thoughtful piece by Charles Krauthammer