|
Chavez didn’t get the Obama memo By Michael C. Guilmette Jr. Originally published on Jan. 22, 2009, in the Connersville News-Examiner. By now, the fanfare has subsided — the celebrants have gone home, the Obamas have moved into the White House, the Bushes have returned to Texas and only trash fluttering in the wind remains on the Mall in Washington, D.C. Millions in the U.S. watched and celebrated the inauguration of Barack Obama as the 44th president of the United States on Tuesday, and millions more around the world likewise took part in the historic day.
On the print side, the New York Times — the yellowing Grey Lady — opined Monday in their travel section that “Washington is suddenly hip again” and that “it’s even cool to wave the Stars and Stripes” because Obama has come to town. Add to it the praise lauded upon Obama’s $150 million inaugural celebration as opposed to the scorn heaped upon President George W. Bush for his $40 million 2004 inaugural celebration, the message in the media memo is clear: If Obama does it, it is good. But then, around the fringes, there may be a few problems developing. In among the thousands of inauguration celebration photos provided by the Associated Press were a handful of shots from Tehran showing clearly jubilant Iranians merrily burning photographs of the new president. Interesting way to celebrate. Also a day before Obama placed his hand on Abraham Lincoln’s bible and he and Chief Justice John Roberts stumbled their way through the oath of office, Hugo Chavez, the would-be socialist dictator of Venezuela, determined with his acute nose that Obama has “the same stench” as Bush. His observation, according to the Washington Post, came in response to Obama telling Univision the U.S. needs to be firm with Venezuela for supporting the leftist terrorist group FARC, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia. Chavez’s nose detected Bush’s alleged smell in September 2006 when, on the floor of the U.N. General Assembly, he said he smelled the odor left behind by “el Diablo.” Back then, it was chic and trendy for Chavez to say so, considering the glad-handing he got from the American left and the visits from 1990s “Lethal Weapon” actor Danny Glover, noted ditch resident Cindy Sheehan and even the likes of William Ayers — who, as we are told, only served on a foundation board with the new president. Chavez was the darling of the left not only for his criticism of Bush but also for his populist programs — including cheap heating oil for the U.S. Northeast — and taking on Big Oil by nationalizing Venezuela’s oil industry. Now, however, Chavez may be in a bit of trouble. When the oil market collapsed in the latter half of 2008, the feeding hand he kept biting — U.S. oil demand — suddenly dried up, forcing Chavez to once again court the oil companies the left has long demonized. But this problem is nothing compared to the rubbish he has stepped in by insulting Obama. Before, he only angered Bush supporters. Now, his words will not only anger Obama supporters but also average Americans who do not want to see their president treated with such disrespect regardless of who actually sits in the Oval Office. This also presents a problem for people who supported ideas similar to Chavez’s. His “Bolivarian Revolution” promises a radical restructuring of Venezuelan society while offering free medical clinics, food and housing subsidies and massive education campaigns. All these promises are also wanted by the left in this country for this country, but if Chavez is going to disrespect Obama, how can Chavez be looked upon as a role model for these kinds of social programs? Going a step further, how can a bill introduced by Rep. Jose Serrano, D-N.Y., on Jan. 6 aimed at repealing the 22nd Amendment — the amendment that imposes presidential term limits — be seriously considered if Chavez, who has long sought to eliminate presidential terms limits, won’t play nice with Obama? Perhaps this is the overall lesson to be learned here. As much as the media and Obama’s supporters want to believe change has come to America, the parts of the world that hate the U.S. have not changed. They do not see Obama’s election as a reason for them to change, and they will continue to hate this country for one reason or another. The day that realization hits home for Obama’s supporters may be close at hand, but when it happens, will they try to look at Obama and his circumstances in a little more realistic light, or will they just send out another memo? • Guilmette is managing editor of the News-Examiner. He may be contacted at mguilmette@newsexaminer.com. |
|||
|
|||
|
Copyright © 2009, Michael C. Guilmette Jr. |
Many in the mass media celebrated the inauguration as well. On Monday, CNN wrote of the expectation that Obama’s inaugural address would one day be chiseled in marble. MSNBC, not to be outdone by the other networks — although ratings show it has been — ran self-promoting advertisements so supportive of the new administration that even average liberals were saying it was over the top. No matter, though, since Chris Matthews, one of their star commentators, said the network has “opened their hearts to change.”
