The obligatory Inauguration post

If I could describe this lib-fest in one word it would be: Yawn. But since this is an opinion blog that requires more than just one word let me try to detail for you the 'highlights' of what transpired. I started out watching MSNBC because I wanted to get the liberal viewpoint. Unfortunately it froze up before the Oath of Office, and mercifully, I was forced (allowed) to switch to Fox. Interestingly, the cleanest feed I could find was from a blogger in India.

There was a throng of "1,2,4 million" in attendance. The real number is of course not known, but certainly there were a lot in attendance. And almost as certainly the MSM will inflate those numbers so that by 2011, they will be talking about the 20 million in attendance at the day of America's re-birth. And of course what liberal love-fest would be complete without a raft of liberal politicians, liberal stars and poetry? The Inauguration of O, did not disappoint on any of those counts.

I believe the MSNBC broadcast was being done primarily by Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews. There were some other comments being made but they may not have been in the broadcast center, but rather field corespondents. The commentary was hyperbolic, it was to be expected. Matthews talked about his tingle. He talked about George Bush being an uninteresting President and someone he would not want to read about in the future, unlike other Presidents.

I believe it was Matthews who also chimed in with "This is not like any other inauguration - you can feel that sense of history." And this little gem; "People are in a democracy and they didn't feel like it a few years ago."  After the swearing in, where Roberts and Obama both misspoke slightly, the Inaugural speech itself was underwhelming. It was a mainly a re-hash of many elements from other speeches. Here is video, so you can hear it for yourself

and part 2;

Sure it had the requisite applause breaks, but there was no astoundingly profound statements from the President, and it seemed more politically tinged in parts than you'd expect from a speech meant to set the tone for a Presidency, especially considering the fact that Obama is supposed to be a uniter rather than a divider. At least according to those on the left, where it's okay to demonize Bush but now that it's there guy, we should all come together and rally around the false Messiah.

There was an additional point worth noting, one that was deliberately leaked to the press beforehand (likely so they could re-iterate the talking points) by the likes of David Axelrod and Colin Powell. the speech by the One, was meant to emphasize the importance of personal responsibility. The reason for that is deliberate. It lowers the impossibly high bar Obama has managed to set for himself through the election cycle. Now that he faces the reality of running something for real - besides a campaign, he cannot possibly live up to the expectations he's set. To be fair, he hasn't really set them - people have set them for him, by buying into the vagueness of his message and applying their own visions, hopes and needs onto them.

By emphasizing the responsibility for Americans to do for themselves, he can spread the blame when he doesn't achieve 100% bliss for every American as 'promised'. Yes We Can will ultimately end up being a disillusionment for many Americans when Obama makes choices that don't mesh with their image of his vision, which is really their own.

Another point in his speech meant to do the same thing was to talk up how terrible the situation is for America. He paints a dire picture of an America doomed. That serves two purposes (1) blame Bush in order to lower expectations about how long it will take to climb out of the mess he inherited and (2) allows him to take credit no matter what happens. If the unemployment rate goes to 10%, he can always say, without my plan to save 4 million jobs, it would have been 12%.

His speech is a clever ploy. because it gives him a lot of wiggle room to go back on any promises and ways to deflect blame for failure. Some people will see through it but his core constituencies who are blinded by their passion of the O, will not, particularly the youth who are clearly gullible enough to have voted for him in the first place.

A couple of other points to consider about the day. Firstly, there were an endless number of balls, and dances between the President and First Lady. While it's the other team, I do not begrudge them their moments. They won, let them enjoy it for a day. There's no need to have ill will on a day that was indeed historic in a superficial way. Superficial because as many are quick to point out, skin color is indeed a superficial thing. The character of a man is how he should be judged, not skin color. I agree. So why the historic importance of black President, besides being the first one? Will it diminish cries of racism? Until now was a black President secretly forbidden? The answers to both of those questions is a firm NO. So superficially, it erases arguments that a black man could never be President.

Having given them their moment their is another point to ponder. Fox was gushing along with the other networks. Many conservatives find that curious. Isn't Fox supposed to be at least Fair and Balanced, if not our voice? David Limbaugh warns against conservatives falling prey to the hysteria. It's a good warning, and there seems to be plenty of conservatives drinking the Kool Aid.

But I think I see the Fox and others' rationale behind not dumping on his parade. If they were to do so, it would give the cards to the Democrats to say that conservatives were never on board from the beginning and there was a preconceived plan to derail Obama from the start. that conservatives are going to disagree with the administration on policy is inevitable. So why allow them more ammunition to blame any failure on post-Bush conservatives as well as Bush? It' going to be a steep uphill battle opposing the agenda of the left, we need to not provide them with any ammunition at all to hammer us back with.