Augusta Chronicle Editorial Staff
Except for celebrating it, the color of Barack Obama's skin never really became an issue.
The thickness of it is, however.
Both the president and his press secretary have repeatedly attacked critics in the media for their -- surprise! -- criticism.
Press spokesman Robert Gibbs has called out critics by name, from CNBC's Rick Santelli to Mad Money host Jim Cramer. And the entire administration seems to have turned all its guns on conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh.
"Barack Obama's administration has uncovered a new Public Enemy No. 1," writes Boston Herald columnist Howie Carr. "From the War on Terror to the War on Talk Radio."
In one sense, you can't blame Obama for being blindsided by the criticism of his policies: The national news media were in such a hurry to get him elected that they didn't bother to stop and question what he might do once elected.
So, of course, no one saw the major shift in policy coming toward America's nuclear waste storage.
Hidden in the president's budget is a move to end the country's development of Yucca Mountain in Nevada as a central depository for nuclear waste.
The country has spent two decades and $13.5 billion on Yucca Mountain. No other feasible long-term alternative for commercial nuclear waste storage has been put forth. But in the blink of an eye, and without so much as a "boo!", the Obama administration has radically changed national policy on the future of nuclear energy.
How confident will nuclear reactor developers be that the federal government has a solid plan for waste? How will that affect the growth of nuclear power -- which, by the way, needs to be instrumental in the Obama camp's desire to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?
Meanwhile, in the midst of the most painful recession since the Great Depression, the president is also attempting a radical reshaping of American health-care policy. But he's started that, as well, in an insurgent fashion: simply including $600 billion for it in his budget.
These are just a couple of examples of how extreme the Obama administration has been in its infancy.
"This crisis provides the opportunity for us to do things that you could not do before," says Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.
"Things," responds columnist Charles Krauthammer. "Now we know what they are."
The nosedive by the stock market since Obama won may, in retrospect, have been in large part a reaction to Obama's radicalism.
Writes former Council of Economic Advisers chairman Michael Boskin in a Wall Street Journal column: "It's hard not to see the continued sell-off on Wall Street and the growing fear on Main Street as a product, at least in part, of the realization that our new president's policies are designed to radically re-engineer the market-based U.S. economy, not just mitigate the recession and financial crisis.
"The illusion that Barack Obama will lead from the economic center has quickly come to an end."
If the country was under that illusion, it was because the national media failed miserably and utterly last year in its sacred mission to inform the electorate.
As a result, the president is seeing a severe backlash, in some cases of the Boston Tea Party variety. And the criticism is surprising and downright irksome to the former presidential candidate who experienced none of this harsh questioning in the cocoon the media spun for him.
The president can write the criticism off to conservative talking heads if he likes. But he needs to understand that criticism comes with the territory. You would think he would understand that, after disparaging his predecessor's performance for the entirety of the presidential campaign.
And it would be nice if he'd answer the criticism with logic and reason rather than putdowns.
Krauthammer wants to know, for instance, why Obama has responded to a housing and banking and credit crisis with a radical remaking of government in other areas.
"Health, education and energy -- worthy and weighty as they may be -- are not the cause of our financial collapse," Krauthammer writes. "And they are not the cure. The fraudulent claim that they are both cause and cure is the rhetorical device by which an ambitious president intends to enact the most radical agenda of social transformation seen in our lifetime."
What a pity we couldn't have had these policy debates before the election.