Trying to Boycott Inauguration Day
I think, today, I’ll keep the radio off, or at least not tuned to Radio 1. I’ll also try to keep away from American news sites, not to mention Canadian ones.
My reasons can be summed up in two words. One is “Obama.” The other is “overboard.”
Look, I’m perfectly happy to concede that today is a historic occasion. We all need to keep in mind that “inauguration,” in America, is the same as “coronation,” here, mainly because the American president, unlike the PM, is head of state as well as head of government. I expect to see something similar, in terms of press tone, when Prince William ascends the throne. (Given his reputation, I’m not so sure that Prince Charles will generate the same level of adoration.)
But it occurs to me that the Western press are so eager to put the Bush Administration behind them as history that they’re tripping all over themselves to see who can out-gush the rest, when it comes to “covering” the Inauguration. And frankly, it’s striking me as a tad unseemly.
No, I don’t remember this level of press ecstasy when George W. Bush was inaugurated. I understand why, of course: the way in which Election 2000 was finally decided pretty much put a damper on press enthusiasm for W. (And W. was never much of a glitzy party guy anyway.)
Even so, when you see headlines like “The Nation Awaits Its New President,” “A City and Nation Prepare to Celebrate,” and even “World waits for the 17 minute speech,” you definitely start getting a headache. Like everyone in the press seems intent on hitting you on the head with a hammer, trying to drive in the point that THIS IS HISTORY, YOU MUST PAY ATTENTION TO ME, DAMMIT!
I’d rather not, thank you very much. Not if you’re trying to become a part of it.
![](http://photos1.blogger.com/x/blogger/1462/1818/320/262511/btweek.gif")
January 20th, 2009 at 08:42
But it occurs to me that the Western press are so eager to put the Bush Administration behind them as history that they’re tripping all over themselves to see who can out-gush the rest, when it comes to “covering” the Inauguration. And frankly, it’s striking me as a tad unseemly.
Oh boy, you nailed it right there.
Just consider what Traversty wrote:
…Canadians share their neighbours’ mixed emotions. Joy at the triumph over prejudice and relief at seeing the toxic back of George W. Bush coexist with recognition of the hugeness of the U.S. task and the slowly dawning realization that the Obama phenomenon brings to this country the qualified blessing of closer self-examination…
What a pile of crap!
January 20th, 2009 at 08:45
[...] – Just Right. Trying to Boycott Inauguration Day – The Phantom Observer. Posted in Obamaphoria, U.S. politics [...]
January 20th, 2009 at 09:18
You might actually want to take a few months off from American TV, the liberals media have been waiting 8 years for this.
January 20th, 2009 at 09:29
I remember the hype over another President who was a First. We all know how that turned out.
However, O might be the first democratic Pres who is faithful to his wife. That would be something.
The prevue channel (good music) and the weather channel are my choices for today.
Might watch a cartoon if the g/kids come over.
January 20th, 2009 at 10:40
Look, I’m perfectly happy to concede that today is a historic occasion.
But sadly you don’t get it. Historic moments in time–both good and bad–are one of the things that binds humanity together. So what you’re essentially saying is that you have no use for humanity and want no part of it.
January 20th, 2009 at 11:09
No, Bob. I wasn’t talking about humanity; I was talking about media overhype.
Neil Armstrong on the moon was a good historic moment. Charles & Di getting married was a good historic moment. Lord of the Rings winning all the Oscars it was nominated for, that was a good historic moment. I don’t mind enjoying those.
But the media going overboard, for the past week, over how everybody is going to be united after Obama becomes president?
Sorry. That’s overhype. More to the point, it’s media overhype.
And it’s worrisome because, sooner or later, Obama is going to clash with his former colleagues in the Senate (not to mention the House) over the direction of government.
Do I believe that this same media is going to call out Obama if he makes a decision that they don’t agree with? Or believe to be wrong?
Or do I believe that they’ll try to stammer out excuses as to why (as an example) he hasn’t gotten NATO to send more troops to the Stan, or why he hasn’t vetoed extraneous earmarks in the U.S. budget, or something else? Because they don’t want to rain on Obama’s parade?
January 20th, 2009 at 12:40
The thing to understand from the just us folks of the US, is the thrill that occaisionally the system works (Bush out, hope in). We are adults, we know that this will be tainted,… and we have dared, with this election to hope that just maybe we can do it better, differently, and harness our optimism.
January 20th, 2009 at 12:48
My mistake. I didn’t recognize this an just another stale liberal media bias screed.
January 20th, 2009 at 13:09
“No, I don’t remember this level of press ecstasy when George W. Bush was inaugurated.”
And with the hindsight of 20/20, it’s clear why as great a fuss wasn’t made. Let’s hope the next 4 years live up to the hype.
January 20th, 2009 at 20:56
I’m with you on this one.
The fawning and gushing are way to much. I was not a fan of Bush, not particularly of Obama either….but here is the kicker. I am a Canadian not an american so quite frankly,my opinion is worth jack.
The fawning that the media has done is quite frankly unfair to Obama who is as flawed as the rest of us, as no man can live up to the myth the media and elites have tried to spin. But again…..thems the breaks.
I am quite content doing my own thing for the next couple of days until this dies down a little bit.
January 20th, 2009 at 23:06
I also had an intentional Obama-less day, and not out of spite for the new president, but as an antidote to the media hype. It was a challenge due to TV’s at work, and staff buzzing. It got their minds off Jen and Brad for awhile.
It was good to engage in a respectful Farewell to President Bush on a few blogs.
I’m still amazed that a man who has had no serious decisions or challenges for his country will no be ‘in charge’. What will happen to America if he faces a 9/11?
January 21st, 2009 at 00:15
[...] I’m with Victor here: I think, today, I’ll keep the radio off, or at least not tuned to Radio 1. I’ll also try to keep away from American news sites, not to mention Canadian ones. [...]
January 23rd, 2009 at 11:02
Blutech
“What will happen to America if he faces a 9/11?”
He’ll do what Chretien did. Hide for two weeks.