Day 231- الشهادة

Dear Mr. President,

At today's press gaggle three numbers were mentioned by the press. 500,000- the number of unemployment claims filed last week, the worst in 2010. 50,000- the number of US troops still in Iraq. And 18- the percentage of Americans who believe that you are Muslim, according to a new Pew poll. Worsening unemployment, the nuance of ending a war, and an poll illustrating that a significant number of Americans (and 31% of Republicans) are not only ill-informed, they're stubborn about it. You weren't at the Press Gaggle, Mr. President, but I'll bet I don't have to tell you which got the most discussion and interest from the press. Why is it that this story just won't quit? That members of Congress can feed it and still be taken seriously? I think it's probably because every time the White House is confronted with this rumor, instead of saying "next question", the press secretary (or, in this case, his deputy) sputter for 5 minutes about your devout Christianity. The President prays, every day. The President speaks to religious advisors, every day. The President speaks with Christian leaders for advice.

I didn't vote for you because I think you're Christian. Your job isn't to be correctly perceived by every yahoo who thinks you were born in Kenya and here to bring about the End Times. No one is going to stop believing that you're a Muslim if they are already convinced it is so. You can't prove faith. Gibbs and Burton can profess your faith before God and the Press Corps every day and it isn't going to change the minds of those 18%. Anderson Cooper got on TV and showed the world proof that your birth certificate is your birth certificate and I am confident that it made exactly no difference with those who still doubt your citizenship. (Though, to be fair, it may have changed their opinion of Anderson Cooper.)

The media is perhaps to blame for devoting so much energy and discussion to this topic. One reporter seemed to imply that the perception was the White House's fault- that somehow the American people weren't able to know their President. I think this, and other suggestions from the press that you ought to talk about your faith more in public, are absurd. The amount of information about you available to Americans is unprecedented. As far as I know, polls didn't indicate a significant number of people suspected President Bush or Clinton or Reagan to be Muslim. This perception is allowed to continue because of xenophobia and racism. People are afraid of the unfamiliar and your political opponents have been trying to paint you as unfamiliar since you started in politics. It isn't something that people need to be persuaded to change their minds about because it isn't rational. It isn't the White House's responsibility to combat this. The perception of you as a Muslim goes up as your poll numbers go down. I don't think people are having new doubts about your Christianity, I think your declining popularity has made it more socially acceptable to suggest their crazy theories out loud. Call a spade a spade (and a racist a racist) and move on.

But this isn't entirely the media's fault, or entirely their responsibility to correct. The discussion about the Pew poll was some of the least guarded interaction between the Deputy Press Secretary and the Press corps. Robert Gibbs and Bill Burton are constantly spinning, obfuscating, splitting hairs, and spewing talking points. Try having a frank conversation with the press about something that actually matters- like the economic outlook or the state of our foreign relations. Instead of coming up with the right sound byte to reassure people that you've got this under control, be honest. Be honest about what challenges we face and how much of the responsibility to overcome them is up to us and the important changes we need to make in our own lives. The White House needs to find a way to connect with people honestly, and the swatting wildly at ridiculous rumors while spinning the latest unemployment numbers (while trying to help half of the Senate run for re-election) just isn't going to cut it.

People do need honesty and access, but not because they doubt your religion. Please, don't let your administration get caught up in this nonsense when we have so many graver concerns ahead.

Respectfully yours,

Kelsey

Day 196- Winning, losing and telling the tale

Dear Mr. President,

I'm not sure what winning is supposed to look like, any more. On day of several ostensible political victories, I've read pieces by Politico and The New York Times that read more like obituaries for your administration. I think that both pieces are poorly written and tend to rely on oversimplification to make their points. Each seem to simultaneously criticize you for overreaching and for doing too little. Little, if any, concession is made toward the overwhelming financial and political obstacles your administration faced due to the previous administration. Is it hopelessly naive of me to think that opinion polling in July isn't necessarily a perfect indicator of what November will hold?

One aspect of the criticisms offered that I do agree with is the folly of your administration's alienation of the media. I think the press can be hostile, self-serving and incredibly cynical. But you can't win the favor of the public without the media. If there has been one consistant victory for the right over the last few years, it has been control of the narrative. We may be winning our fair share of political battles, but we are not the ones writing the history of it. I think that repairing the administration's relationship with the media, and re-engaging directly with the press, could be important steps toward reversing the trend of analysis that casts victories as either meaningless compromises of values or as imposition of the administration's will on a reluctant public, (or, inexplicably, both.)

The left has plenty to be upset about in the compromises that your administration has agreed to, and the issues you've sacrificed without a proper fight. But the progress made in a time of economic distress has been commendable. I don't believe that enough of that story is getting through, or that the right-wing narrative of your secret plan to dominate the globe through back-door socialist revolution is being effectively combated. And while the tone of news coverage certainly matters less to me than the substance of what your administration is doing, I think that re-engaging the press corps (and increasing engagement with the kinds of new media that got you elected in the first place, like bloggers,) would go a long way toward improving the way voters feel about your accomplishments. I'm not an expert or anything, but I don't think that limiting press conferences and basically ignoring new media opportunities to reach an audience that doesn't get its information on CNN or FOX is a communication strategy that will allow you to reach many of those Americans who aren't personally attending your town hall meetings on economic recovery. I still have a great deal of hope for your presidency, and I'm proud of what has been achieved today, but if I were learning about it only from the news coverage, I might wonder why we're all wearing black and talking in the past tense.

Respectfully yours,


Kelsey

Day 158- Helen Thomas

Dear Mr. President,

Helen Thomas's remarks were offensive to many people. I don't think there is any one, including Ms. Thomas, who would deny that. Her remarks have inspired more forceful outrage from your administration than the 9 dead civillians on board the Mavi Marmara. I can't speak for any one else, but that offends me, deeply. What Helen said, while upsetting, didn't kill any one, didn't destroy families or cut short the life of an American teenager. Her words didn't cost any one an eye, didn't shed a single drop of blood. Yet, while the 9 innocent dead managed to summon your dismay and regret, her non-lethal words were called reprehensible.

Murder is reprehensible. The prolonged suffering and starvation of the people of Gaza is reprehensible. And I would have no problem with your administration calling her words reprehensible, as well, if you had managed the same level of outrage after the flotilla attack. Her career, a long and distinguished one that inspired a generation of women in journalism, is now over. I don't think that what she said was right, I don't think that what she said was fair, but I know, for sure, that no one died as a result.

I know these last few weeks have been spent trying to strike the right emotional note with the American public over the oil spill, to some how demonstrate your emotional response is proportional to this tragedy. The hypocrisy of the reaction with regards to Ms. Thomas and to Gaza, the anger stirred over words contrasted with the mild dismay over injury, suffering, and death is, in my opinion, a much more problematic demonstration of how out of step your administration is with the human cost of your policies.

Respectfully yours,

Kelsey

Day 139

Dear Mr. President,

Tonight you're having a state dinner for the President of Mexico. The First lady looks beautiful, the food sounds amazing, everything looks perfect. I'm at home, making dinner with my best friend, on one of those rainy nights that Seattle makes its reputation on. It's surreal to see the photos of the guests coming to dinner in dresses worth more than next year's tuition will cost me. I'm not dissing $10,000 gowns, or anything, but it is a clear reminder that there is an echelon of American society I'll never be a part of.

The media speculation that you're avoiding the press corps in order to dodge questions about Arlen Specter's primary defeat yesterday seems a bit hysterical, to me. I think that Specter was defeated by a better candidate, with a more solid history as a Democrat. It can be spun as part of an anti-incumbency trend, or as a failure of the White House's political mechanism, or as yet another sign that the world is going to end in 2012; I think, however, that when local or state-wide elections are described to be indicative of a national trend, voters rarely consider that when going to the polls. Pennsylvania democrats were probably voting for the candidate they thought would be best for Pennsylvania, not making a statement about national political trends. I think it was probably a mistake for the White House to endorse Specter, but I recognize that considerations of loyalty and strategy are probably more important than the media's perception that the President's endorsement isn't a magic bullett.

That being said, I think you should probably hold a press conference and let the press corps have at you. It's tedious and undignified and usually not much different from the talking points the White House is already using, but it does people good to see their President engaging with the media, and gives us the idea that you're willing to answer challenging questions. So many of us will never get an answer from you, directly, it's nice to see journalists asking for us, even if the right questions often elude them in their haste to obsess over process stories.

Respectfully yours,

Kelsey