Why I am Offended with the Media’s title “Obama’s Charm Offensive”

I keep hearing this phrase being echoed in the media Obama’s Charm Offensive and just the name offends me.  I have studied on this for quite some time and looked at it from several different angles only to come back to the same conclusion.  It is offensive to me.

 

The media say that he has to do this because it may mend some fences and make governing easier.  They say it is needed to get his agenda across and leave a lasting legacy for all to remember and one for the history books.  I can see their point but it stills riles me to think that the title is nothing more than a nice way of saying that in order to get things done in Washington, this particular president needs to kiss congress’ rings.

 

I take offense to this because, for me, in order to mend some fences, you should be the reason those fences are broken.  I cannot see how that could be the case when the opposition met before he was even inaugurated and decided to do all that they could to derail his agenda.  I cannot see how those fences were broken when he said to a crowd in Chicago “that even though you did not vote for me, he will still be their president and do all that he could to benefit this nation as a whole.”  I don’t see how those fences were broken when he began his time by fulfilling some of his campaign promises.  After all, is that not why we vote people into office based on what they say they will do when they get there?

 

I take offense to this because having to kiss another’s ring to get your agenda across makes no sense to a man that spend years in the military where the mission was paramount and all personal issues were sidelined.  It makes no sense to me if what he wishes to do is clearly something that will benefit the nation as a whole and not blatantly appeasing one group or another.  It makes no sense to me if what he is attempting to do can be proven to hold every one responsible for their actions and open the door for a more interactive Washington.

 

I take offense to this because when it comes to a lasting legacy, these will be written by others who may or may not insert their own feelings and thoughts into how his legacy should be written.  Anyone fool can find the things that best prescribe his or her point of view because creating a lasting legacy is not determined by what is done but how it is perceived.  His legacy will be the first Black President, the first Mixed-Race President and the first born in Hawaii and the second from Illinois.  His legacy will be the only one able to get healthcare done, shut down the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, getting rid of Don’t Ask- Don’t Tell and Defense of Marriage Act.   His legacy will be the one who got Osama bin Linden, securing the rescue of the captain of the ship captured by those pirates and the dismantling of al-Quada.  All these and many others will be those things remembered by many but his legacy may be shaped by those of the few who may not see things like the rest of us.

 

What this charm offensive really mean to me is telling the slave that he has to do whatever the master tell him and bend and bow with every change in the wind of this master.  When Lyndon Johnson fought to get Civil Rights into law, it is reported that he “twisted arms”.  When Ronald Regan or George Bush pushed to get his agenda done, it was said that he “lit a fire under them”.  When Bill Clinton sub legated and offered up some important principles to get bills passed, it was reported that he was only “proving his earth-shaking ability as a politician” but this president has to be one who needs to charm those who decided early in the game never to side with him on anything.  Even those ideas that they once championed only a few days or months ago.

 

If this president never accomplished anything else in his remaining years in office, he still will have done more than all those listed above but history may say something completely different.  After all and again, history will be written by the few and may never reflect the perception of the many.  But then, this could be just me and I could be wrong.