JONATHAN CHAIT JUNE 21, 2010
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
Most everything associated with President Obama—his policy platform, his public style, his personal story—have become grist for intense partisan conflict. I had thought that the one remaining uncontroversial scrap was his endorsement of fatherhood, which he has been doing periodically since he appeared on the public scene. But even this can now spur outrage, at least by Ira Stoll, who has attracted a lot of attention with a column denouncing Obama's fatherhood initiative:
President Obama interrupted my Father's Day with an e-mail announcing the launch of "The President's Fatherhood and Mentoring Initiative" ...So I ignored my children for a few minutes of Father's Day and did what the president asked which was to check out the Web site, and especially the government's "Tips for Parents." They were infuriating.
I'm no technological wizard, so I am not sure how an email "interrupted Father's Day." I have one of those email systems that you only read when you want to check email. Perhaps Stoll has his email set up to buzz loudly every time a message arrives, and he hasn't figured out how to disable the feature. I would suggest that, if the arrival of an email is going to interrupt Father's Day, try leaving your computer or smart phone off, or in a different room. (I thought about emailing this suggestion to Stoll, but I worried the message might interrupt his sleep.)
Also, I'm pretty sure that when Obama suggested readers check out the web site, the implication was that they should do so when they had some available time. It was probably not meant to be read as a demand that readers check out the site right then. But I blame the government for failing to spell this out. The disclaimer should be made explicit, the way consumer products feature warnings like "Do not jab this product into your eye socket," in order to account for the wide variety in reading comprehension levels of the American public.
So I can see why Stoll was upset that the government set off his email buzzer, and was further upset by a message that could easily be interpreted as a federal demand that he leave his children and look at a website immediately. What I don't understand is why he proceeded to ignore his children further by composing a column on Father's Day. Perhaps he did this as a collaborative activity with his children—which, come to think of it, would explain a lot.
Let us proceed to Stoll's objections with the website:
Here was tip number two: "Watch a game on television with your children. Cheer for your favorite team and chat about the plays. Mute the commercials and use those minutes to talk about what's going on in your lives." Here is the government telling Americans to "mute the commercials." Suppose I work at an advertising agency and earn my living making commercials, or own a company that has just invested millions of dollars in those commercials in the hope of winning customers and making a profit? Suppose I own a television network that makes its money by selling those commercials? Suppose I am a taxpayer who has just shelled out major bucks for the Army or the Census or some other branch of the government to buy these commercials, only to have another branch of the government instruct Americans not to listen to the same commercials my tax money was just spent to purchase. If I had any advice for fathers, it would be to mute the ballgame and turn up the volume for the commercials, or turn off the tube altogether and go play a game with your child. But now the government wants us to mute commercials? Really.
He is upset that the government is urging fathers who watch sports with their children to mute the commercials and talk with the kids. The free market system apparently requires that the young tykes obediently watch the commercials so they can determine which brand of light beer to drink when they turn 21. Is there no corner of American capitalism Obama doesn't want to destroy?
Here was tip number three: "Take a virtual vacation with your children. Decide on a 'destination' then borrow a library book that features facts and photos of your dream locale. Prepare a meal based on the native cuisine and enjoy it together while you watch a documentary about the country or a movie that takes place there. Let these fantasy voyages be your passport to lasting family memories." The assumption seems to be that the dream destination is outside America, unless by "native cuisine" the government means corn and venison.
In Obama's defense, I'd note that he is not urging parents to actually visit foreign countries, which of course would be grounds to impeach him and deport him to his native Hawaii Kenya, but is merely suggesting they imagine doing so. Still, it is true: Obama is presuming that people dream of vacationing in foreign locales over the good old U S of A. Stoll's own honeymoon took place in Youngstown, Ohio.
Another tip: "Buy compact florescent light (CFL) bulbs, which last about 5 years and use less energy. Switching just one standard bulb to a CFL can help you reduce your electricity bill by as much as 75 cents per month." I used to believe in this idea. Then, after putting CFL bulbs all over the house, I found that they don't last five years. They may last a couple of years.
Stoll has temporarily moved on to "green tips," but his outrage remains unabated. The government is relying upon studies comparing CFL bulbs to old-fashioned incandescent bulbs. I'd be willing to believe that Stoll's one-man focus group could produce superior data. But his inability to solve technical challenges like the buzzing, can't-be-turned-off-or-walked-away-from computer gives me pause.
13 comments
It is an outrage that the federal government wants parents to mute out Madison Avenue. Why, if this became a widespread practice, children might beg for fewer things and they might be less materialistic when they grow up. There might not be as much obesity. We just can't have this. Call your senators and representatives and protest this indignity. And flood the White House with protest messages. The American Way is Saatchi & Saatchi, and we just won't allow Barack Obama and his minions to interfere with it.
- liberal reformer
June 21, 2010 at 10:55am
It never ceases to amaze me how silly and trivial the level of things that obsessive Obama haters worry about.
- MikeB.
June 21, 2010 at 11:03am
It's a reflexive response: "Whatever Obama says or does, I MUST find some way of opposing it!"
- zardoz67
June 21, 2010 at 11:14am
I imagine Stoll's just a bit confused. He imagines that when the president recommends something (e.g. GWB exhorting us to go shopping after 9-11) it's the same as the federal government instructing us to carry out some task on the pain of being arrested and deported to one of those reeducation camps that the health care legislation set up.
- ironyroad
June 21, 2010 at 11:21am
Ah yes, Ironyroad. This is just like when Obama gave a speech urging Americans to look at different news sources rather than the ones that just give them their views back. There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth, that Obama was thus destroying the "free press" and he was "Orwellian" for telling Americans "what they can read."
- MikeB.
June 21, 2010 at 11:36am
It's obvious how it interrupted Stoll's day. He presumably read it early in the morning along with his other emails, and periodically throughout the day had PTSD-related flashbacks which interrupted his daily activities, much the same way that similar symptoms plague Vietnam vets who saw combat. I recommend emdr, but using an active bee hive instead of a pen.
- miceelf
June 21, 2010 at 11:42am
We snicker, but might this not presage a more sinister move by the Rovean right? After all, the Rove playbook is to use fabrication to turn an opponent's strengths into weaknesses. Since the Obamas seem to have the most well-adjusted, traditional nuclear family of any modern first couple, making up dirt and then throwing it at the president's family would seem a natural next step for conservatives. I suspect Stoll's column amounts to a trial-of-concept to see if anyone objects. When it's inevitably not taken seriously, the floodgates of made-up attacks on Obama as a father or husband will open. I'm sure Sarah Palin can tell us what a poor job Obama is doing of raising daughters.
- rhubarbs
June 21, 2010 at 11:50am
I too don't understand why the right gets so worked up over everything Obama does. On the other hand, why do his advisors (I can't believe Obama actually did it) insist on giving such vacuous advice? Obama has the reputation of not condescending to the American people, but how does one square that reputation with the advice about hitting the mute button during commericals so you may talk to your children, or cooking some exotic meal (or is it supposed to be a virtual meal like the virtual vacation). The truth is what's even more worrying: it doesn't occur to many (most?) parents to hit the mute button so they can talk to their children, or that virtual vacations can be enjoyable or even possible (i.e., they have never read a book).
- rayward
June 21, 2010 at 11:50am
Usually Chait's overwrought snarkiness causes a roll of the eyes and a lament that I can no longer regularly read the sweet earnestness of The Other Jonathan. But this one had me spitting my coffee on my computer screen. Now, if only I could figure out how to turn off those email alerts...
- Tilghman
June 21, 2010 at 12:07pm
Irony, good point. I'd further ask what's the difference between asking shoppers to continue shopping and suggesting that they mute commercials? I'd guess that Stoll's answer would have to do with asking shoppers to continue a market activity is not verboten since the government is telling you to continue to shop. Of course that changes the conversation from what government can and can't suggest to one that says that as long government statements conform to conservative orthodoxy, they're okay. What a goof.
- jet
June 21, 2010 at 12:10pm
I think the grousing over Bush's shop-till-you-drop call was less a deliberate misunderstanding -- although there was some of that, as at root he was trying to encourage normality -- than a feeling that the president was tone-deaf in a sort of moral/ethical musical way. There was a jarring disconnect between the kind of national crisis we were facing, where everyone wanted to contribute something meaningful, and the snappy jocularity and narrow-guage materialism of Bush's exhortation. In Obama's case, that doesn't apply. He's not tossing witty comebacks into a serious national conversation. At most, he can be accused of stating the parenting obvious -- the TV won't actually raise your children itself. The problem here seems to be less what Obama said than the fact that he said anything. In the current conservative mindset, a presidential endorsement of breathing would have conservatives vying to see who could hold the air in longest.
- ironyroad
June 21, 2010 at 12:41pm
"Buy compact florescent light (CFL) bulbs"??? For shame Obama, I say we impeach his ass for this. Doesn't he know about: LED (Light Emitting Diodes) Light Emitting Diodes Light Emitting Diodes (LED) are bulbs without a filament, that are low in power consumption and have a long life span. LEDs are just starting to rival conventional lighting, but unfortunately they just don't have the output (lumen) needed to completely replace incandescent, and other type, bulbs just yet. Never the less, technology is advancing everyday, and it will not be long until the LED bulb will be the bulb of choice for most applications in the home and work place. (For more info on LEDs see: LED Lighting - the lighting of the future) Now granted, this might be ok for mere wasteful people, but I move from pole to pole during the year so I have as little use of electric lighting at all. Right now I am north of Nome Alaska, saving a ton of money by using natural light.
- blackton
June 21, 2010 at 12:47pm
blackton, "north of Nome Alaska" sounds a lot like Tom Waits's "And when you're east of East St Louis . . ."
- ironyroad
June 21, 2010 at 1:29pm