Among my academic credentials is a M.A. degree in history from a university of some note. Therefore I am more aware than the average person of what scholarship is. I clearly know the difference between opinion and primary source material. I distinctly know the difference between opinion based at least on some factual information and support, and blatant distortions of truth. I know the difference between Fox News and the New York Times, or between NPR news and Rush Limbaugh, or between Rupert Murdoch and the BBC. When one enters the blog world or cyberspace generally, these differences begin to blur to various degrees. People think that if it is on the 'net it must have some basis in fact; it often does not have even a remote connection to fact. The Encyclopedia Brittanica states clearly that it intends to present information based on fact as much as is possible, Wikipedia states up-front that its source material is from questionable sources. If you do not know the clear difference in the aforementioned, you live in a world fraught with ignorance. Period.
By any measure, President Barack Obama's first days in office have been a huge success. Not only has he had to immediately jump in to try and fix a financial mess of epic proportions that was inherited from Bush, but myriad other problems confront him from the last 8 years and longer. While it is well to keep in perspective what was turned over to him from the neocons, we should move past it. But the right-wing nutcases won't allow that to happen. They want him to fail, and they will make every little misstep become a tragic headline. Imagine a shady, slithery drug user like Rush Limbaugh saying, "I hope he fails." Imagine Newt Gingrich, who fooled around with aides and other women in Washington, passing judgment on Obama. Imagine a snake like Dick Cheney criticizing Obama. Think of the gall of these hypocrites.
Lady Bird and Lyndon, Pat and Dick, Betty and Gerald, Roseanne and Jimmy, Whatshername and Ronny, Barbara and George, Hillary and Bill, Laura and Junior. Not exactly a classy group. Is that the best the United States can do? Each duo had their missteps, some were monumental tumbles. The last U.S. president had trouble using the English language. Barack and Michelle did not get into academically prestigous universities because their fathers pulled strings. They EARNED their way there. And they came from circumstances that are much more akin to the average American's life. Yet they bring class personified to their positions of President and First Lady. And it shows in all things.
As we scan back in American history, people whose perspective was right-wing or conservative or fundamentalist were usually people who had a more privileged or comfortable existence. Their selfishness proclaimed conservatism at its core because they wanted things to remain just as they were: with them in their comfort zone. This meant that sharing was not at the center of their thought or living. So, what they viewed as threats to their selfish, comfortable world were: taxes, equality, help for the needy or poor or unfortunate, immigration, people whose color or ethnicity was "different," sharing, rights for everyone, guaranteed healthcare, etc. Almost an endless set of excuses were formulated to preserve the status quo at any "price." The "general welfare" was considered socialistic talk and below the favored class.
You didn't think the election of Barack Obama to the U.S. presidency got us out of the danger posed by the greed-capitalism of the Reagan-Bush era, did you? President Obama is facing a tremendous challenge to try and right the economic and political ship of state that was so pummeled by right-wing selfishness. After World War I economic disaster struck the world harshly when European and American government officials allowed banks and industry to call the shots, and government was left to try and protect the general populace. When there was an outcry in the Western World growing to give voice and relief to the common people, here is what happened...