In a startling ambitious budget message, President Barack Obama has thrown down the gauntlet to the American Right not only by tying the current economic crisis to the recklessness of the past eight years under George W. Bush but by tracing it back further to the anti-regulatory, anti-labor and anti-government policies of Ronald Reagan.

“For the better part of three decades, a disproportionate share of the nation’s wealth has been accumulated by the very wealthy,” the 142-page budget message states. “Technological advances and growing global competition, while transforming whole industries -- and birthing new ones – has accentuated the trend toward rising inequality.”

Though Obama lays the bulk of what he calls “a legacy of mismanagement and misplaced priorities” at the feet of the Bush administration, there is no mistaking his larger message – that the problems which were “exacerbated” by Bush’s tax cuts and other pro-rich policies have been building since Reagan’s 1981 inaugural declaration that “government is the problem.”

Obama even made a glancing reference to that formulation in his preamble to the budget message. “We need to put tired ideologies aside, and ask not whether our government is too big or too small, or whether it is the problem or the solution, but whether it is working for the American people,” Obama said.

To the American Right, those are fighting words, and leading right-wingers have already trotted out their curious charge of “class warfare,” an ironic message given the fact that the growing disparity in American wealth reveals that “class warfare” has long been at the heart of Reagan-Bush policies – and the rich are winning.

Yet, while it may be audacious for the young President to take on the well-entrenched forces of reaction in Washington, there is another reason for Obama and his supporters to worry. The national news media remains largely enthralled by the pro-Republican rules of the past three decades.

In both right-wing and mainstream news organizations, stories continue to be structured as faulting Obama and largely absolving Bush (not to mention the iconic Reagan).

Look for example at the lead stories in the New York Times and the Washington Post on Saturday. Both describe the stomach-turning 6.2 percent drop in the gross domestic product during the last quarter of 2008. Though that was the last economic quarter of the Bush administration, the stories instead were framed around Obama’s failures.

The New York Times cites “a sense of disconnect between the projections of the [Obama] White House and the grim realities of everyday American life.” The Washington Post says “the worse-than-expected data fueled doubts about whether the Obama administration had adequately sized up the challenges it faces.”

What is remarkable about the two stories – and similar ones at other leading newspapers – is that the name “Bush” is nowhere to be found. Instead of a negative slant against Obama, the stories might reasonably have read that George W. Bush left behind an even worse economic mess than previously understood.

The newspapers could have explained how Bush’s policy prescriptions – such as large tax cuts for the wealthy, a neglect of regulation and the declining living standards of the middle class – had pushed the United States to the brink of economic catastrophe. There might have been at least one reference to how Bush contributed to “the grim realities of everyday American life.”

Or some of the commentators who have been criticizing Obama’s dire warnings about the state of the U.S. economy – accusing him of “talking down” the economy – might have extended an apology, admitting that the President was more correct than they were. They might even have noted that Bush actually had “taken down” the economy.

But that would require a break from the media paradigm of the past few decades – and there is no sign that the powerful right-wing news media has any intention of changing its ideological ways, nor that the mainstream news media will stop its endless attempts to prove it’s not “liberal.”

The only times Bush gets mentioned these days, it seems to be in the most favorable light.

For instance, while forgetting to mention that the fourth quarter of 2008 fell during Bush’s presidency, the U.S. news media gave Bush lots of credit for Obama’s announcement that he will withdraw all U.S. combat forces by Aug. 31, 2010. CNN and other news outlets cited Bush’s Iraq War “surge” as the reason Obama could pull out troops.

In other words, Bush gets credit for Obama ending an unnecessary war that Bush launched almost six years ago, while Obama is faulted for the 6.2 percent drop in the GDP under Bush.

As Obama sets off on a hazardous political journey – seeking national health insurance, a “greener” economy, educational and infrastructure investments, and higher taxes on the rich – he can expect continued hostility from most of the American news media, both on the right and in the mainstream.

That may be a structural problem that could prove fatal for the President’s goals.
_______



About author
Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, Secrecy & Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq, can be ordered at secrecyandprivilege.com. It's also available at Amazon.com, as is his 1999 book, Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & 'Project Truth.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2009/022809.html

first of all the uberwealthy have infiltrated our government using lobbying as its primary tool and contributions next.

Big business is a front for all of these so called elite and are what you can consider a kind of Illuminati.

Next is the utter misrepresentation and deregulation as well as privatization that are eroding the functionality of our government.

Political parties all are playing to ambitions of greater powers that hide behind these parties. On the right we have ultrachristianity and on the left bleeding heart socialists and commmies!

What ever happened to the standards we set up as a nation? They all keep getting reinterpreted and the standards changed.

One of the greatest tragedies is the utter lack of financial responsibility and Obama is already proving how acute the problem is with his stimulus and with the people he is surrounding himself in government with. he has tax evaders, criminals, child pornographers all running to his side to take mantles of position to run this country. America just does not get it. Government was supposed to regulate and not actually RUN everything. Socialism never works because the costs are too high. Labor unions are vastly over stepping their powers in manufacturing. Government's answer to everything is tax everyone.

So what is the fix all answer?

Let us tax banks more! Let us begin to affect taxation on the top 5% who manage to dodge the system. Lets make our government accounted to us for it. But how? Why not have the government hold itself to a perfomrmance standard. If they operate in the red they don't get paid for starters. If they cannot solve the problem in two years we hold elections and fire the lot of them!

Would be a good start!

obviously another person that doesn't understand about the fact that we wouldn't even be having to pay taxes if the federal reserve didnt exist and our government printed our money.

I think the fix is campaign finance reform. As long as elections depend on donations the poor and middle class will be second fiddle the the money class who can voice their opinion far beyond what their numbers represent.

only if you can bribe the electoral voters. people's vote doesn't trump the electoral vote at all.

I think part of the solution would be a constitutional amendment calling for term limits in the congress and requiring those seated in elected office to give up that seat to seek another. No take-backs! No more standing in two conoes.

let me get back to you on that one

Another good one would be that no politician who loses his seat can be appointed to any job in the federal gov't. If you're not good enough for the homefolks, you're not good enough for the country at large.

very good point.