.

Barack Obama’s 50th and MTV’s 30th, But Who is Having a Better Birthday?

The Chief Executive is a lot grayer on his 50th birthday. The question is, is he “Over the Hill” politically?

Editor's Note: The following opinion piece does not reflect the views of Norcross Patch. For another opinion on Obama on his birthday, please look here. 

Barack Obama is 50 years old today and MTV is 30 years old this week. The two have a great deal in common: They are generational peers - though certainly not equal, both truly believe they’re in the mainstream and neither has stuck to their original message.

MTV is a mere shell of what it once was, more Reality Television, nowadays, than Music Television.  Likewise, all of the “hope and change” that the group Rock Star Barry & His Friends promised during their 2008 nationwide tour is nowhere to be found on the Political Billboard’s Top 50 Hits, unless you count the fact that most Americans “hope” we can survive before the nation is “changed” into a third-world country.

We’re behind on the world economic stage as well and have been for a while – a couple of years.  For as long as most of the world can remember, the phrase “full faith and trust of the United States government” meant something to those who looked to American treasury bills and the U.S. dollar as safe economic havens anywhere in the world. 

Now?  Now, that trust has been shaken because we came incredibly close, within a matter of hours, to defaulting on our debt for the first time – ever – this week. 

But what was Obama concerned about? 

His re-election; getting a birthday present in the form of a debt ceiling increase that would be enough to cover him until after the 2012 elections.  That’s important because, when you’re a “tax and spend” president with approval numbers at 40 percent and heading south, you’ve got to have the money for special interest groups that can help you “position” your bid for re-election. 

To paraphrase the famous Winston Churchill anecdote: Obama turns to MTV at a music awards “after” party and says, “MTV, I see your latest ‘reality’ show is a flop.”  To which MTV replies, “And we see you’ll soon to be out of a job, Mr. President.  However, tomorrow we will produce a ‘new’ reality show, but you will still be out of a job.”

Happy Birthday, Mr. President.

About the author:  Randy Wyles is an award winning business and political journalist and a regular contributor to Norcross Patch.com.  His weekly column, Creekside Journal, appears each Sunday on Johns Creek Patch.com. Wyles is also the Senior Investigator for the Alpharetta, GA based private investigations firm of Hunter Investigations, LLC. and has worked under private contract for the U.S. Department of Justice.

lee kellogg August 04, 2011 at 11:44 AM
Please, follow up with that long list you are saving of conservatives who aren't aiming everything they say and do at their re-election campaigns. Those selfless souls who blocked financial reform, blocked exposure of wiretapping American citizens for no reason, every aspect of healthcare reform, and eliminating torture as a government policy. Or, just come up with one name if a list would be too hard.
Randy Wyles August 07, 2011 at 05:05 PM
Here's a good idea, Lee. Try to top this list of reasons why Barack Obama should not be re-elected: - 9.1% unemployment - $4 trillion in increased debt - just since he took office and, of course... - an S & P downgrade for the FIRST time in, let's see...forever. The list could go on and on, but the fact is that if Obama were the CEO of a company, he would have been fired Saturday - after the 500 point drop in the Dow on Thursday and Friday's S & P downgrade. If he were the head coach at UGA, Georgia Tech, 'Bama or even Florida - he would have, again, been fired Saturday. In February 2009, he told the Today's Show that if he can't get the job done in the following three years then he should be a one term president. The unemployment rate in February 2009 was 7.6 percent. We're well into the third year. By his own admission, it's time to start packing and making plans for a new library and his memoirs - which would be titled "Sorry, My Bad."
lee kellogg August 07, 2011 at 08:35 PM
Here's a better idea Randy. Be responsive. Too much, okay. Football and corporate profit taking are not anything like civics. I know, that's a hard concept, but all governments work on the basis of income they don't have. ALL. Who was in charge of that government in 2008? Any ideas? How much was lost in the stock market then? What direction was that unemployment rate headed? What was the surplus the last time a Democrat was President? Show me your screed belittling George Bush, I'll show you a CEO that should have been jailed.
Randy Wyles August 07, 2011 at 10:00 PM
Since you missed the obvious; the use of "football" and "corporate" America examples in this case are analogies, not a "screed" - though I truly admire your use of a word that will make a lot of people go to the dictionary. Seriously, Lee, I enjoy talking, debating - even sparring with someone with a vocabulary. But, back to the issue at hand, I've covered politics and business most of my life and I understand very well how the two systems work, having had a front row seat to much of it over the last 30 years. Barack Obama is no Bill Clinton...and Clinton didn't have a war to fight on two fronts. Obama has the same tools to work with and the same obstacles to face as did G.W. Bush, but Obama's administration has created 40 percent more debt, much, much higher unemployment and no sense of compromise with The Hill. Bush did know the art of compromise and practiced it well. He did it at the federal level and he did it at the state level - I know. I watched it. So, no, I didn't drink the Obama Kool-Aid in 2008 and I'm not thirsty now.
lee kellogg August 09, 2011 at 12:53 PM
Another question is, did Boehner and McConnell have birthdays this year? How is Obama's fuel for your fire? There were riots in England the last few days, was that Obama's fault? Has the unemployment rate risen more under Obama than Bush? How much of the debt is the search for WMD in Iraq that Bush wouldn't allow as a part of federal debt, but is now? Those examples of selfless conservatives and compromise from Republicans are deep kool aid. All it takes is a memory and consistency.
Randy Wyles August 10, 2011 at 03:23 AM
First, neither Boehner nor McConnell are the President of the United States. It was Obama’s 50th birthday – a significant milestone in life. Yet, rather than run the country and invite Standard & Poor’s to the White House to see if he could use the power of the Oval Office to persuade S&P against a downgrade, Barry spent his time attending “birthday parties” that were actually fund raising rallies for re-election campaign funds. Second, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, when George W. Bush took office unemployment was at 5.3 percent and dropped to 4.4 percent, settling at 6.6 percent by the end of his second term in 2008. In 2009, under Obama, unemployment soared to 10.1 percent and currently rests at a 9.1 percent. Third, according to the CBO, during the Bush years, annual deficits averaged $204 billion – which included the cost of two wars, the worldwide search for terrorists (who never struck on American soil again), the search and capture of the most ruthless dictator since Hitler and the search for WMDs that the entire world thought were in Iraq at the time. However, in less than 3 years, Obama has run the deficit up 40 percent with very little to show for it but a downgrade of the nation’s credit rating for the first time ever. The riots in Great Britain are the result of “flash mob” hoodlums run amuck with BlackBerrys (the assessment of Scotland Yard). Yes, accurate memory among liberals would be a good thing – for a change.
lee kellogg August 12, 2011 at 01:16 PM
For conservatives--a pass--never any problems. I'm sure you know about lies and statistics. Bush deficit spending is okay; searching for Bin Laden in Iraq, sure. Obama kills Bin Laden, that's useless waste of taxes. For just one example, among many, the Israeli government didn't believe the WMD scam. Bush cut taxes, why I wonder would the unemployment rate go up, by your numbers, 2.2 percent and help lead us into the worst financial crisis since the Depression? Cutting taxes is supposed to fix every economic problem, isn't it?
lee kellogg August 12, 2011 at 01:32 PM
By the way, here is what really happened at S&P: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/61147.html Sorry the link isn't highlighted, but what it says is that the fear mongering and lies of the Tea Party and Republicans were what caused the rating change. At least that's what S&P said was the cause. Why take the company at its word? That comes 3 days after the initial change, in which the company also said the federal government would have to raise taxes in order to shrink the deficit.
TheLaw August 25, 2011 at 05:28 PM
Anyone notice a trend of one person is posting facts and evidence while the other person is unable to do so?

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »