Home \ Contents \ Site Search \ Contact

THIS PAGE LAST UPDATED 01-15-2010

Some Election 2008 Afterthoughts

by Greg Williamson (c) 2008, 2009, 2010

COPYRIGHT RELATED INFO

UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL SCRIPTURE QUOTATIONS

ARE FROM THE  New American Standard Bible.

 

While there is sure to be any amount of second-guessing and so forth regarding the 2008 elections, I wanted to share just a few thoughts of my own.

A corrupt, conspiratorial media versus open, honest coverage.

It's certainly no secret that the mainstream media treated Barack Obama with kid gloves from day one of his campaign (see How the media helped Barack become president). And the excuse that he was "a relative unknown" was proved impotent by the media's dogged refusal to make him known, particularly through refusing to offer thorough, unbiased reporting on Obama's past history, including his many infamous associates (see Media drink Obama's '8 years old' Kool-Aid). A well-known journalist actually admitted as much at a conference of his peers. "During his panel discussion, Mr. Halperin was asked if the media has been too soft on Senator Barack Obama. To the surprise of his mostly liberal audience, his answer was yes. He went on to explain that the media helped Senator Obama in many ways through the stories they chose to cover and the way they covered them. He concluded that the national media handed Senator Obama 'hundreds of millions in free publicity'" (see Media bias against media bias). Not surprisingly, Mr. Halperin's comments received little coverage.

Of course not everyone has been content to remain silent regarding Obama and the conspiracy of silence surrounding his bid for the presidency.
   
 

The contrast between, on the one hand, the huge amount of material about Obama's radical associations that has been published in on-line journals and in a few brave newspapers, and on the other the refusal by big media to address it and to vilify those who do, becomes more astounding by the day. ...

 

You have to pinch yourself -- a Marxisant [sic] radical who all his life has been mentored by, sat at the feet of, worshipped with, befriended, endorsed the philosophy of, funded and been in turn funded, politically promoted and supported by a nexus comprising black power anti-white racists, Jew-haters, revolutionary Marxists, unrepentant former terrorists and Chicago mobsters, is on the verge of becoming President of the United States. And apparently it's considered impolite to say so.

-- Melanie Phillips, Spectator.Co.Uk, 10-14-2008

As blogged by Marcia Segelstein (about mid 02-2009), two Newsweek correspondents who covered Obama's presidential campaign made a very disturbing confession:
   
 

More fascinating info from Bernie Goldberg's book, "A Slobbering Love Affair: The True (and Pathetic) Story of the Torrid Romance Between Barack Obama and the Mainstream Media."  (Read my column about the book here.)

The day after the election two big media names were guests on the Charlie Rose show.  Jon Meacham and Evan Thomas, both of Newsweek, suddenly decide to admit that they know very little about the man who's about to become President of the United States, despite the fact that they've covered him closely throughout the election.

Here's some of what Meacham said: "He's very elusive, Obama, which is fascinating for a man who's written two memoirs."

And from Evan Thomas:  "There is a slightly creepy cult of personality about all this … It just makes me a little uneasy that he's so singular.  He's clearly managing his own spectacle.  He's a deeply manipulative guy …"

Thanks, guys, for sharing this when it's too late.  We certainly didn't hear the mainstream media voicing much doubt or concern about Obama before the election.

 

And as reported by Mary Faulds in the March 2009 AFA Journal:

 
 

Last year was full of events that changed the cultural landscape. Ted Baehr, founder of Movieguide, a family guide to movies, believes five major things happened in media and entertainment in 2008 that reflect the state of the culture we now live in. "The media shapes the culture," he said. "It is extremely important for people to become culture-wise, to become aware of the media's influence. Ideas have consequences. People's entertainment and words shape the scripts of behavior of children and adults."

1. Media Bias
 Baehr's number one event reflects that sentiment. He said President Barack Obama might not have been elected had it not been for the blatant bias in the media.


"It completely confused the country on what the people who were running for election stand for," said Baehr. "The day Obama got elected, one of the producers of Saturday Night Live said that they took on Gerald Ford back in the 70s and portrayed him as a bumbling fool, although he wasn't a fool. He graduated near the top of his class at Yale. And he wasn't bumbling, he was a starting football player at Michigan, but the image stuck. This time around, they decided to pick on Sarah Palin and the image stuck."

 

Baehr said the American people fell for the media images that were created instead of who the candidates really were. Baehr said many people weren't able to determine whom to vote for based on the facts, but made decisions based on caricatures the media invented.

 

And not to be overlooked is the Media Research Center's year-end look at 2009, including its "The Coronation of the Messiah Award for Fawning Inaugural Coverage" category The winner was Bill Weir:

 
 

"We know that wind can make a cold day feel colder, but can national pride make a freezing day feel warmer? It seems to be the case because regardless of the final crowd number estimates, never have so many people shivered so long with such joy. From above, even the seagulls must have been awed by the blanket of humanity."

-- ABC’s Bill Weir on World News, January 20. [MP3 Audio (0:25)]

 

Skin color versus character.

It has been reported that 95% of black voters voted for Obama. Besides identifying with the Democratic party, these voters saw themselves as a part of history in the making by electing the first black president. But while it is indeed a historical moment, it strikes me as more than a little ironic that it runs directly counter to the wishes of the renowned black leader of the civil rights movement, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., whose famous "I have a dream" speech included these words: "I have a dream my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by content of their character. I have a dream today!" (August 28, 1963). Like everyone else, Obama's character -- his "main or essential nature" (Webster) -- can be assessed via his words and deeds over the long haul, including his extremely radical support of abortion which, it should be noted, continues to claim the innocent lives of an enormous number of black children (see Racism Alive and Well at Planned Parenthood).

 

Lieutenant Colonel Allen West (US Army, Retired) is many things: a retired army officer, highly educated, a distance runner, a scuba diver, motorcyclist, etc. He is also a black conservative. In his 16 June 2009 blog he compares America under Obama to the Twilight Zone episode titled "To Serve Man," in which it was discovered too late that the race of aliens who seemed so interested in our well-being did indeed want to serve us -- on a platter! West: "Another group which wholeheartedly drank the kool aid to the tune of 97% was my own black community. I cannot tell you how many times I had deep discussions with family and friends about the 2008 Presidential elections. It would always end up with something like this, 'Allen, you just hate him and I don’t care about those issues. I want a black president.'"

And I must admit that I find it more than a little hypocritical that the mainstream media is falling all over itself to speak favorably of "people of color," denounce slavery, etc. Why? Because (1) that is something they should have been doing all along rather than waiting until a black man was elected president, and (2) they are fueling the impression that skin color trumps character, as their silence regarding the latter is deafening. For example, it says much about the liberal mainstream media that few people know very much about Condoleezza Rice -- despite her having served "in one of the most powerful and influential positions in the world."

Personally, I could not care less if Obama was purple with orange stripes. What matters to me is not the color of his skin but, rather, the quality of his character. And based on his past activities, including what can only be described as a long list of un/anti-American activities and associates, Barack Obama's character is anything but exemplary, let alone one befitting the President of the United States of America. While I respect the office and appreciate the American political system that puts someone there, I cannot always respect the individual person holding that office, and such is the case now. In the words of J. Vernon McGee: "Although there may be unworthy men in the office, we are to respect the office. When I was in the army, I was told to salute the uniform. There were some folk in that uniform that I didn't care about saluting, but I saluted the uniform. We are to show respect for authority. A Christian will be the best citizen although his citizenship is in heaven." And as Warren Wiersbe has noted: "Even though we cannot always respect the man in office, we must respect the office, for government was ordained by God."

Material possessions versus spiritual realities.

In his book True Spirituality, renowned Christian apologist Francis Schaeffer addresses the lie that the vast majority of Christians live: we say we believe in an almighty, personal God, but in our everyday affairs we live as if he is totally absent. The end result is that we live like materialists, putting far too much stock in the physical world and not nearly enough in the spiritual. The solution? Repeatedly dying to self so that we can truly live for God. All of this is highly relevant in light of the fact that (1) nearly half of all voters claim to be "born-again Christians" (although only 1 in 7 meet the criteria for "evangelical") (see Why 'born-again' Christians are backing Obama), and (2) the number one issue on voters' minds was the economy. Along these lines, Schaeffer's remarks regarding the church apply with equal force when it comes to our desire for overall economic well-being. Put simply, we are called to live by faith and not by sight.
 

Organizational and financial matters should not be allowed to get in the way of the personal and group leading of the Holy Spirit. ... Organizational and financial arrangements of the church should not rule out faith or contradict the supernatural. They should not rule out the exhibition of the reality of the existence of God. Throughout church history, one is aware that the danger always comes at a time of emergency. An emergency arises which causes us to cut off the exhibition of faith and discount the possibility of God guiding in financial and other matters. There always seems to be a legitimate reason for reaching out and steadying the ark. As Uzzah reached out to steady the ark, he thought he had a good reason for disobeying the word of God (2 Samuel 16:6, 7). At this point, he no longer trusted God to steady the ark. ...

 

We tend to think of Christ building His invisible Church, and our building the visible church. We tend to think in this kind of a dichotomy. ...

 

Instead of that we should always look to Him and always wait and pray for His leading, moment by moment. ... [T]he church of the Lord Jesus Christ should be functioning moment by moment on a supernatural plane. This is the church living by faith, and not in unfaith. This is the church living practically under Christ's leadership, rather than thinking of Christ being far-off and building the invisible Church, while we build what is at hand with our own wisdom and power. This places the church in the supernatural battle, extending into the heavenlies, and not just in a natural battle. This raises the battle from being merely the battling against other organizations, other men, to a real battle of the church in the total war, including the unseen war in the unseen portion of reality. This makes the church the church, and short of this the church is less than the church. With the objective standard of the Word of God, and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, in these areas we are to be yielded to Christ. (True Spirituality)

Empty words versus principled beliefs.

Maybe I'm the only one who feels this way, but it strikes me as very odd how both John McCain and President Bush have spoken well of Obama following the election, including offering their apparently sincere congratulations. I realize this is considered the courteous thing to do, but did I miss something, or isn't this the same John McCain and George Bush who were the targets of extremely heated rhetoric and derogatory remarks (to put it very mildly) beginning 22 months ago? While I don't believe in holding grudges, to brush all that off as if it never happened is to give the distinct impression that in the end all those words -- words that were highly instrumental in helping Obama defeat McCain -- really do not matter. And what of the things that were said about Obama? If they were true during the campaign, then they remain just as true now; the truth has not changed simply because Obama has been handed the presidency. Is it any wonder the general public has such low regard for politicians and the political process? Is it any wonder so many people value style over substance?

Campaign fodder versus real, tangible issues.

All the issues that really matter have not, and will not, go away. Issues such as abortion on demand, gay rights, expanded versus limited government,  the destruction of human embryos, cloning, socialism versus capitalism, and a host of others. That is because these type issues represent profound ideological differences with very little, if any, room for compromise.

With the Democrats in control of both the Congress and the Presidency, you can bet reshaping our entire country along liberal lines will be their number one priority. And if past actions are any indicator, shutting down their critics is sure to be one of their preferred tactics.

Preserving our great American Judeo-Christian heritage will call for tremendous effort on the part of both social conservatives and evangelical Christians. We will need to pray hard and work hard as we strive to articulate our ideals with compassion, persistence, and respect.

Liberal versus conservative.

It is being reported that Obama's election amounts to a landslide victory that proves most of the nation has gone to the left ideologically. There are calls for the Republican party to surrender on outdated social issues such as abortion and gay rights in order to keep the party from fracturing even further. It's time for a "New New Deal," heralds TIME magazine as it depicts Obama as the new FDR. There will be an embracing of the intellectualism that has been stifled for so long in America, we are told (see Intellectuals). It seems that the Obama Kool-Aid is becoming the drink of choice within some circles, and that Obamamania is far from subsiding.

Lest we forget, Obama won the popular vote over McCain by a margin of 52 percent to 48 percent. That  amounts to neither a landslide victory nor incontrovertible evidence that our nation has gone radically left. The stats can be compared, for example, to those from Bush's 2004 win of 51 percent to 49 percent.

Barack Obama won the election for several reasons, including:

  • Obama ran a very strong campaign, while McCain's campaign was anything but.

  • In what was the longest, most expensive presidential campaign in this country's history, Obama spent a LOT more money than McCain. What was not touted by the mainstream media, however, was some of the highly questionable circumstances surrounding huge portions of the money raised by Obama.

  • As noted above, the media was in Obama's pocket from the beginning. Their refusal to provide thorough coverage of substantive issues helped to explain why, for example, some voters believed Obama was pro-life -- despite the fact that he is radically pro-abortion (see How Obama Got Elected).

  • McCain was not able to overcome the economic tsunami that swept across the entire country, nor could he shake the badly mistaken notion that the Republican party was to blame (see The REAL reason for the financial mess we are in).

  • As reported by the Family Research Council, some four million church-going voters who voted for Bush in 2004 chose not to vote in the 2008 elections. Add this to the number of voters who opted for third-party candidates and we have a more accurate picture of the election results -- both what was, and what could/should have been.

     

FURTHER READING

Another example of media bias

Challenging Times Present Chilling Temptations

Election 2008: Hindsight and Foresight

Freedom Now Stands Alone

Help wanted: President -- no experience required

How Obama Got Elected

How the media helped Barack become president

Intellectuals

Media bias against media bias

Media drink Obama's '8 years old' Kool-Aid

Obama: Fundamental Change? Count on It

Obama's vision far from that of Founding Fathers

Racism Alive and Well at Planned Parenthood

The REAL reason for the financial mess we are in

Socialism! There, I Said It

Style over substance

Why 'born-again' Christians are backing Obama


 Home \ Contents \ Site Search \ Contact