by Jeff Swanson
It’s no great story that Obama was not at all present when debating Mitt Romney October 4th. I mean, it was a great story and newsworthy but it’s no longer a fresh-off-the-press newsflash. Republicans were surprised by Mitt Romney’s domination and not at all surprised by Obama’s epic fail (as the kids say).
The far more vast electorate saw the real Barack Obama. That is to say; the Obama we have come know as feckless.
The electorate doesn’t realize that the great professor, or should I say Senior Lecturer, wasn’t all that well revered as an instructor. According to the broad review of The Obama You Don’t Know, Mark Tapscott details, “In 1999, only 23 percent of the students said they would repeat Obama’s racism class. He was the third-lowest-ranked lecturer at the law school that year. And in 2003, only a third of the student evaluators recommended his classes.”
The University of Chicago law department only educates a few hundred people at a time, our now President Obama couldn’t have been elected to a small town school board with a 23% return.
Perhaps what’s significant, these people didn’t know they were in the presence of greatness. They saw him as only an instructor. I’m guessing if you asked the remaining 77% percent of his students if they knew they were taking a class from the future leader of the free world, I assume the collective response would be ‘Are you kidding?’.
Also noted in Tapscott’s series was Obama’s propensity to show up for, well, nothing, “Senior lecturers were, however, still expected to participate in university activities. University of Chicago Law School Senior Lecturer Richard Epstein told The Washington Examiner that Obama did not do so.
Obama, (Richard) Epstein said, “did the minimal amount of work to get through. No one remembers him. He was not a participant in luncheons or workshops. He was here and gone.”
The rigors of a part time job can be overwhelming, I’m sure. I assume being President must be a living hell for President Obama.
According to Breitbart, “According to a recent study by the Government Accountability Institute, Mr. Obama has only attended 43.8 percent of his Presidential Daily Briefs in the first 1,225 days of his Administration.”
If you’re not familiar, the Presidential Daily Briefing (PDB) is the venue where the President gets his daily update of affairs international and of security importance. You might remember how much this was debated about the pre-September 11th, 2001 for Bush and what was perceived as his failure in not catching the impending attack. However, at least Bush attended them.
Presidents do miss them periodically. Obama missed all of them for the week prior to the recent Egypt/Libya attacks. No wonder he was peddling the ‘it’s the video’ story. In reality, it was a subterfuge of what was really true; that getting the PDB on your Presidential iPad isn’t quite going to get the job done.
In the end, he and his Administration missed the warning given outright by the now dead Ambassador.
Fecklessness can be dangerous if you’re President. The PDB is not a faculty meeting, it’s a brief about people with weapons trained on the United States. Perhaps some of us would have preferred he vote ‘present’. At least Obama would have been at the meeting.
This is my sour grapes speaking. Still, he does demonstrate a distinct lack of being present in the current happenings of our nation and specifically the economy. This comes in the form of ‘Blame Bush’.
We’ve heard the President oft repeated tag line, ‘(the) policies that led to the crisis in the first place.’
We return the the debate. We return the the empty chair (as depicted by the New Yorker). Obama had little to say about his four years. If you timed the debate, Obama said enough to best Romney by four minutes in actual talk time.
Yet he said nothing…at the debate.
While not intended, the post-debate Obama defense is best detailed in the pre-debate ad by the Obama team wherein the President stated, “Now Gov. Romney believes that with even bigger tax cuts for the wealthy, and fewer regulations on Wall Street, all of us will prosper. In other words, he’d double down on the same trickle-down policies that led to the crisis in the first place.”
This remains the standing line for Team Obama.
Except that it is not true and no attributions as to the accuracy in the ad. To that end, via Jonah Goldberg quoting Ezra Klein (not known for his hardcore righty cred), “I am absolutely not saying the Bush tax cuts led to the financial crisis. To my knowledge, there’s no evidence of that.”
This remains the party line. Not a strong one at that. If you aren’t selling Ezra Klein, who can you sell?
But we’re talking about the fecklessness of Barack Obama.
Though he states he has become fond of the moniker ‘Obamacare’, where within his campaign rhetoric does he tout the signature achievement? If your own accomplishment doesn’t rate a proactive mention in your own campaign, you might be feckless. If your signature achievement is only neato for Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz (…and don’t get me started on Ed. I once lived in Fargo. I know the real Ed), you might be feckless.
Before I steal too much from Jeff Foxworthy, the point is that Obama can’t even achieve effectively.
Obama is a smart man if a bit overly partisan. The case for the Presidency of Fecklessness is less weighted on incompetence but on an indifference to the electorate and his lack of responsibility to the duties of the office.
Not showing up and blaming others seem to be definitionally Feckless.