Do you remember when you were a teenager and you got into a fight with your parents because you thought you should be able to stay out until 11:30, but your parents said you had to be home by 11:00 p.m. even though, that one time, your brothers got to stay out until 11:30? Remember how the mayor of your town made a statement about parental unfairness to the press and mandated parenting classes for all? No? That’s because government has no business intruding in the private affairs of citizens and because, frankly, they have better things to do. Unfortunately, Obama doesn’t possess this filter. His need to weigh in and rush to judgement on random situations is, quite frankly, bizarre.
Our first taste of this was the infamous “Beer Summit.” In case you forgot, here’s a quick recap. Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr. was arrested on July 16, 2009 after trying to break into his own home, as the door was jammed shut. A neighbor saw an attempted break-in and, as good neighbors do, called the police. Cambridge, Mass. police officer Sgt. James Crowley responded to the call. There are various stories about what happened next, but Gates was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct.
On July 22, Obama criticized the arrest, saying that the police had “acted stupidly,” but also admitted that he was friends with Gates, which might have influenced his take on the incident.. He admitted that he did not have all the facts, but was ready to pass judgement. He later backpedaled on his comments, saying he hoped this whole affair would prove to be a “teachable moment.”
Obama invited the two to attend what came to be known as a “Beer Summit” at the White House. Crowley and Gates joined Obama and Vice President Joe Biden for a beer to discuss what had happened, the molehill out of which this mountain had been made. It would seem that, not only did Obama want to comment on the story, he wanted to be part of the story.
There is no reason to believe that, although Gates is African-American, this was in any way racially motivated. Obama agreed that there was no evidence, but that didn’t stop him from rushing to judgement: “I don’t know…what role race played in that,” he said, but “separate and apart from this incident is that there’s a long history in this country of African-American and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately.”
Then why bring it up? Why does Obama feel the need to inject himself into stories and make them into examples of larger problems which may or may not be related? Why would a president would be involved publicly in such a non-issue at all?
This was a gross misstep for a novice politician, and one from which he would be expected to learn. It was, after all, a teachable moment. Unfortunately, nearly three years later, he is still at it.
In March, without knowing the facts, Obama weighed in with another rush to judgement in the death of Trayvon Martin. This time, he even even got the Justice Department involved. Obama again inserted himself into a local police matter, making it a racial issue when there is no evidence of such motivation. Another common thread? He flung himself into the story.
We still don’t know what happened the night Trayvon Martin died. What we do know is that the media took this tragic story and tried to create one in which America is a land of rampant blind racism.
I shared last week why the media focused on Trayvon Martin, and why Obama was ready to chime in, but it remains remarkable that he would presume to involve himself in a local police investigation. As per usual, Obama couldn’t help but make it, at least a little bit, about himself. He said that if he had a son, he would look like Trayvon. He says we need to “do some soul searching…examine the laws and context for what happened.”
If he wants context, why we didn’t see this kind of outrage when a 13 year-old Caucasian boy was set on fire by black attackers in what we know was a racially motivated crime? Why did so many media outlets not even mention race? Obama, in telling us to look at the laws, is referencing gun control. We don’t see this kind of outrage when black youths kill other black youths in gun crimes. It’s equally tragic, and much more common. It seems, from these examples, that Obama selects issues strictly to stir up discontent and to divide Americans. It’s not very presidential.
Another issue he is using to stir up discontent is the so-called “Republican War on Women” or “Reproductive Justice” – if anyone can adequately define that, you get a cookie – or whatever they are calling it this week. There is a lot about this meme that’s questionable, one of which being the timing. This storyline popped up not long after the Left called for a women’s summit in the wake of the fabricated War on Women.
Is Obama now taking direct orders from the likes of Rachel Maddow? In this instance, Obama could make a case for being relevant to the discussion insofar as it related to Obamacare as an issue of government encroaching on personal religiously influenced decisions, but it was because a Georgetown Law student named Sandra Fluke was called a rude name that he tried to make it a presidential issue. Now he’s taking the advice of radical leftists to exploit women on a national level.
President Obama, please focus on issues that concern you and try to run the country. You only have a few months left, and then you can go back to whatever shenanigans take your fancy. Just pretend to be presidential for a few more months, please.