What’s up with CNN? After the last debate they never stopped drubbing President Obama. Even after this debate they still seem to be favoring Mitt Romney. They are political wonks, who love following every nuance of an election, ad nauseum, especially Wolf Blitzer. I can’t decide if it is making the election more interesting or turning it into an exercise akin to diagramming sentences.
I am beginning to believe that CNN is not just trying to report on a presidential election, they are trying to influence the election. Maybe that is just the nature of the 24 hour news beast that in trying to fill each day with interesting, gripping news they actually begin to skew the news in a direction that matches their reporting. Perhaps pressure is being placed on CNN because they have fallen in the ratings or perhaps one of their key sponsors ChristianMingle.com, with its right-wing sponsors, is steering them by threatening to pull their ads. Whatever is going on, I suggest that their endless criticism of the President’s performance in his previous debate and their insistence that Joe Biden was terribly rude in the Vice Presidential debate may have helped to move the electorate.
They have been repeating the fallacy that Obama does not have a plan for the economy but it is clear that Obama plans to continue on as he has been going. I know this is the crux of the matter. People are very unhappy that Obama’s methods are too slow, that they are not offering an instant cure to our economic woes. That is what people have found appealing about Romney’s plan. It sounds like it will bring immediate and extremely positive economic results. After all he has promised us 12 million jobs (I believe it is over the next 10 years, though, not actually immediately). Whatever – he sounds like he knows exactly what to do. He has a lot of big business friends. Maybe he can pull it off. He reminds us that Ronald Reagan did it. Well he is no Ronald Reagan and we are living in different times. Maybe cutting taxes for everyone will balance the budget but it certainly sounds counterintuitive. What is obvious is that Mitt Romney never brings up the “environment” or all of the challenges we face with doing business in such a way that we also safeguard the planet we call home. No one has actually brought up the environment because how can you argue about the effects of fossil fuels on the climate when the other side insists the effects are minimal or nonexistent.
Obama’s plans for the economy are not “sexy”. He feels that slowly, through effort and innovation and energy independence (that tries to keep environmental concerns in mind), we will build a new American economy that is oriented towards the future needs of a world that will contain 9 billion people by 2050 and that the America we build in this fashion will be stronger than an America that goes backwards to try to woo the same factories who left America with lower taxes, lower wages, fewer or no benefits, no environmental protections and few business regulations. Obama has managed to hold to his agenda and make some progress even though he had no support from Republicans and precious little from Democrats who were fearful about keeping their posts. I truly believe that Obama has the better approach to the economy. It doesn’t rely on magic and it doesn’t rely on going to corporations to beg them to come back to America. It relies on retraining, retooling, reimagining and rebuilding. He is more like an orchestra conductor deciding when the strings should come in and how loudly or softly they should play, when the brass needs to be heard, and etc., than he is like an old style “pol” who says anything to get into office.
Obama will involve the whole orchestra, in other words, he sees the American government and America as not just a business entity, but also a social entity which is what a government must be. With Romney we don’t know what our health care will look like but we know it will not look like it does now, we don’t know what will really happen to social programs that “lift up” the 47%. We have no assurance that the economy which is skewed towards the wealthy will be “unskewed”. I do not feel confident, if Romney is elected, that four years from now Roe v. Wade will still be the law of the land. Romney exudes traditional values which put wifey in the home as a helpmate. I’m not saying things will go this far, but he is not exactly a feminist. Romney conducts only a string quartet. String quartets are lovely, but not nearly as difficult to juggle as a full symphony orchestra. If we could give Obama four years with true bipartisan support I believe we might see something really great: the beginnings of our future. For those who imply that Obama cannot expect bipartisan support and that therefore we need to go with Romney instead I say he will be even more harmful because he does have bipartisan support and he only has it because he doesn’t want to change anything. He, and the Republicans, are yearning, yearning for what we had and going back to 1950 would be the best scenario of all. I don’t think we can get back to 1950, or even that that would be a good thing.
CNN, if you are not trying to influence the election then be more careful about what you are doing. Maybe scale back your election coverage and cover the other things that are going on in the world. You are turning us all into election junkies. Obama does have a plan for the economy and it is the better plan.