Skip to main content

I remember hearing that Muhammad Ali was Barack Obama’s favorite athlete, so maybe this is an appropriate story to tell the day after Obama’s victory. As I was listening to the network coverage of the election results last night and this evening, I was reminded of something I read after Muhammad Ali defeated George Foreman for the Heavyweight Championship nearly forty years ago. I was struck by the similarity of the treatment in the press of Ali’s victory and Obama’s victory by certain journalists.

For those who are unfamiliar with the career of Muhammad Ali, he was an enormous underdog coming into his fight with Heavyweight Champion George Foreman. Foreman had won the championship by annihilating Joe Frazier, the man who had beaten Ali, in two rounds. Foreman was considered invincible. In one of the most famous fights in boxing history, Ali employed the now famous rope-a-dope strategy to exhaust Foreman, before eventually knocking Foreman out in the eighth round. This diary is about the reaction of one writer to that fight and how it relates to the press coverage of yesterday’s Democratic victories,

One of the most remarkable aspects of Muhammad Ali’s career was his relationship with the press. No matter what they wrote about him, Ali seemed to enjoy the attention. There was no telling how he might react, but he always seemed purposeful. Whether it was promoting his fights or explaining his positions of conscience, he took it all in stride. However, over the years, many reporters seemed develop a deep hatred of Ali, which they were unable to contain when they wrote about him. One of the most famous of these was Red Smith.

At the time Red Smith was considered the dean of American sportswriters by many. He was writing a column in the New York Times, I believe called,  “Sports of the Times“. He hated Muhammad Ali. And it was apparent in virtually everything he ever wrote about Ali. So after Ali fought one of the greatest fights in boxing history, Smith wrote a column all about George Foreman’s deficiencies. He did not give Muhammad Ali one ounce of credit. He wrote about Foreman’s poor training habits, his inexplicable strategy, his overrated prior victories, etc.. I will always remember the column, because it was memorable not for its subject matter but for the obvious bitterness of the man who wrote it, which brings us to yesterday’s election.

As I listened to yesterday’s network election coverage, it struck me as remarkably similar to the Red Smith’s column after the Ali Foreman fight. What should have been viewed as a remarkable victory, was instead dissected and explained away. It was all about explanations, or demographics or campaign strategies, or Romney’s inadequacies. In an election that was not very close, in very tough times, Obama was given absolutely no credit for having been a good President against tremendous odds, and unprecedented obstructionism.

The networks wanted the story to be about a tight race and a narrow victory, with a dismal prospect for future successes, so that’s what they made it. This was actually  a dominant electoral victory, and a clear and convincing popular vote victory. Barack Obama has every right to claim a mandate. But the media will do everything to prevent it, because they are afraid to buck the right wing narrative of current events. The media also seems obsessed with making sure that Obama’s second term is more difficult than his first.

I repeat, I did not hear one person venture the opinion that Barack Obama had been reelected because he had been a good President or because he had earned a second term. This to me is astonishing.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site