The Anatomy of an "Evolution"

Two days ago, President Obama set off a media frenzy with his revelation that he now supports gay marriage and believes all gay couples should have the right to marry.

Within hours, every media outlet was running stories praising his empathy, courage and ability to "evolve."

Should his announcement really come as a surprise?

Of course not.  For as many conservative writers have pointed out, President Obama has long been a supporter of gay marriage---well, at least whenever it was politically advantageous to him.

His support of gay marriage is not what leaves me unsettled---rather, it is the timing of it.  Furthermore, the the media's coverage of it has been almost too much to take.

It feels calculated.  It feels manipulative.  It feels contrived.

Is it any shock that all of this broke just days after Friday's Labor Report which reflected a slowing of economic growth?  Is it any surprise that it came just days after many national polls showed the president sliding behind Mitt Romney?

Is all of this simply a desperate attempt to to change the conversation?  Has the president really "evolved" or is he just pandering to his base?

***

In 1996, Obama advocated gay marriage, but in 1998 during a re-election for state senate, he "evolved" and suddenly became "undecided." By 2004, he was "A fierce supporter of domestic-partnership and civil union laws.  I am not a supporter of gay marriage."

For three and half years, the president has been silent about his "struggle" with the gay marriage question.  He has done little to intervene and speak up in the many gay marriage amendment votes around the country.  Was his silence a reflection of his "struggle" or simply his "awareness" of voter sentiment?

But in a re-election year, sliding polls, a dismal economy and his health care legislation possibly being thrown out by the Supreme Court, this president was desperate to change the conversation.

Historically speaking, social issues have proven to be a great motivator for voters.  Was the timing right for an "announcement?"

Vice President Biden's appearance on Meet the Press set the stage perfectly.

When Biden revealed that he was "absolutely comfortable with gay marriage,"  it was the perfect litmus test to measure the public's response to such a high ranking official making such a bold announcement.  The public's reaction was relatively subdued, so the media immediately began to swirl speculation and excitement about whether or not the president's views had changed.

Then on ABC News, Obama makes his historic announcement.

Bam.  The perfect storm for the perfect diversion.

He is now being praised for his courage.  Praised for his empathy.  Praised for evolving.

***

Then published against the backdrop of Obama's "courageous evolution" fest by the media, the Washington Post broke a story yesterday that when Mitt was in high school, he participated in bullying a fellow classmate.

Although the witnesses don't all appear credible, the Washington Post still ran the 11-page story.

Coincidental timing?

Mitt Romney has since come out and although does not remember the specifics of this incident, he openly apologized for any childish behavior or poor judgement that he may have had in high school.

It should be noted that this alleged incident took place in 1965.  Was Mitt Romney a bully?

A few things are clear: first of all, this appears to be an isolated incident.  As far as I am aware, the media has not been able to produce any stories beyond 1965 where Mitt Romney bullied either his co-workers, his associates or business partners---but rest assured, the media is undoubtedly searching.

Secondly, if Mitt Romney was indeed a one-time "bully," from the time of his high school days, Mitt Romney has unarguably "evolved" into a remarkable person.  He is an commendable leader with praiseworthy accomplishments.  He is a man whose life is driven by his faith.  A man who is extremely charitable and a man who along with his wife, has raised 5 exemplary sons.  Mitt Romney has contributed in countless ways to the business environment in this country and furthermore, his vision has time and again, fixed countless broken systems.

If he did indeed participate in poor judgement in high school, his life now reflects an individual who has "evolved" into an charitable person with exemplary leadership skills in business and economics.

Does Romney's "evolution" count?

According to the media, no way.

Their focus continues to be on Romney's alleged childish behavior when he was a child.  No one wants to possibly acknowledge that in time, he too, experienced an evolution and has become a more empathetic and compassionate individual.

Ironically, the media was more than willing to overlook President Obama's questionable associations with radicals and also his spiritual devotion to a racist and hate-filled preacher just 5 years ago.  And today, the media is full of praise for his ability to "evolve" into an empathetic and courageous leader regarding gay marriage.

So, as far as I am concerned, the anatomy of evolution is only significant and noteworthy if it fits into a specific political agenda.

As I said before, it feels contrived.  It feels manipulative.  It feels calculated.

I kind of feel like I am stuck in the 1997 movie, "Wag the Dog."

This president and the media might be trying to "Wag the Dog," and make me focus on the President's evolution to empathy, but it isn't working with me.  I call it pandering.  I also call it a distraction.  The media used to call it "flip-flopping."

I am not buying it.