President Obama and Free Speech

The news has been rife lately with stories of a brewing war between radio host Rush Limbaugh and President Barack Obama. This battle raises questions about the value and role of a loyal opposition party and the way Obama uses the media to further his own agenda. With increasing attacks on Republicans and reporters who ask tough questions, the future of a loyal opposition party is in doubt as it was from late 2001 to 2003.

For instance, Obama is trying to rally support his bloated stimulus package and bluntly told the GOP: "I won," implying that the Republicans should stop asking so many questions because they lost the election.¹ The media says little about it, but I have a hunch that if Bush had made a statement like that they would be tearing him apart for arrogance.

To dare question his policies means you are not "cooperating" and are part of the problem Obama is trying to solve. This, combined with his attack on conservative media and the Democratic Party's support for the reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine does not bode well for opposition free speech. This growing sense that if you oppose Obama you are somehow backward or obstructionist is a troubling sign. Apparently Obama plans on making all his big plans come true by shaming, silencing, and tearing apart anyone who disagrees with him.

Another sign of Obama's attempted stranglehold on the media and the flow of information came today when he became irritated when questioned by reporters about appointing a lobbyist to a the post of deputy defense secretary after he had declared no lobbyists would be in his administration. The tension was only reduced after a cameraman complemented Obama by excitedly calling him "Mr. President."² One could imagine a groupie upon being allowed into Zeppelin's inner sanctum for the first time reacting similarly.

The Politico cites a "growing frustration" with how Obama is treating the media contrary to his "open government" pledges. They accused him of stifling access to his second swearing-in. We can't say that these signs of non-transparency and distaste for any opposition entering Obama's bubble is shocking. During the campaign there were several events that his opponents regarded as anti-free speech. During the race for the White House his campaign tried to shut down a radio show in Chicago because the scheduled guest would be speaking about his ties to terrorist William Ayres.³

We can only hope that the pro-Obama media bubble that they created over the past few months will not come back to haunt us as the President has apparently gotten used to being treated with kid gloves and doesn't like it when people ask something more substantive than what color dog he is getting. In another disturbing trend for anyone who does not get stars in their eyes at the thought of Obama, he is expected to appoint chief proponent of the Fairness Doctrine to the head of the FCC when the current chairman's term expires in June.⁴

What will happen next? Surely those of us who worry will be told we are overreacting. But these same people who will try to get us to look the other way are probably the ones who said Bush would suspend elections, or eliminate free speech and create a police state. We aren't going that far, but what is disturbing is that it is becoming increasingly dangerous to speak out against Obama without being labeled a partisan extremist. Personally, I am in favor of cooperation with President Obama, and I differ from Rush Limbaugh here. But my position is nuanced.

Republicans need to cooperate with Obama because we don't want to do to him what Democrats did to Bush before he does anything wrong. But we have to keep our heads. Our job is to protect the American people and if Obama does pursue his massive government projects as he is expected to, Americans will need a party with their interests at heart. Some Obama fans incorrectly feel that cooperation should mean we don't stand in his way. They say we should let him do what he wants because "he won." I say that cooperation does not mean unquestioning, blind loyalty and that we as Republicans need to uphold our duty as the loyal opposition.

The mainstream media will not hold Obama accountable, and if the Fairness Doctrine goes into effect, neither will Talk Radio. The Internet is the only refuge for free liberal and free conservative speech, and some elements are even trying to regulate this arena. These are troubling times, and the Republican Party would do well to establish themselves as an effective loyal opposition party. The trick is being careful to avoid becoming simply obstructionist. These times call for nuanced positions and arguments, and unfortunately nuance is not something American politicians traditionally do well.

Sources:

¹http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17862.html

²http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17831.html

³http://www.stoptheaclu.com/archives/2008/08/28/obama-campaign-tries-to-shut-down-chicago-radio-show/

⁴http://radioequalizer.blogspot.com/2008/11/obama-appoints-radical-media-activist.html