http://www.wreg.com/news/wreg-bp-rage-ms,0,5893229.story

…I breathlessly await cries of liberal outrage directed toward Barak Obama, admonishing him to watch his blame-BP-not-me rhetoric, lest he provoke violence in the unwashed masses.

What I found more interesting than the series itself are the myriad reactions to its finale: Depending on the speaker, it explained nothing or everything, and even those who believe it offered a resolution differ widely on their interpretation. Apparently, the writers achieved the ultimate in post-modern fiction: It means whatever you want it to mean—including nothing at all.

Regardless of whether you believe the writers were lost, cynically serving up a commercial emperor with no clothes, or improvising a writerly jazz of philosophical improv that wandered aimlessly through six seasons, throwing out questions, repeating motifs, hinting at ultimate meaning, yet existing for no reason other than to ask questions, it really doesn’t matter. This was television, after all. It’s not as though it could change the landscape of America or the world.

Would that the same could be said of its real-life reflection, the Obama campaign and presidency.

It is LOST’s intentional ambiguity that reminds me of Obama. Like the show’s writers, Obama convinced millions to follow along as he spun a charismatic tale which fed their hopes, while withholding enough real information about himself to remained a blank canvas on which his followers could project whatever they liked.

Millions did just that: He blew rhetorical smoke laced with the buzz words and catchphrases of the post-modern university, and the press swooned in the haze of scholastic nostalgia.

The flower children of yesteryear and their naive young adult offspring joined in a generational reenactment of a 60s love fest: Hope, change and peace, man. The socialist utopia that the elder generation failed deliver was again within their grasp, and its psychedelic colors now included a lovely shade of ecological green.

And the middle? That jello of American politics saw a post-partisan, post-racial outsider who would Get Things Done. What things didn’t matter so much, so long as they were done and done without all that nasty political noise.

They all saw what they wanted to believe, and they voted for it.

How many wish they could retract that vote, we may not know for some time to come. Yes, November cometh, and that right soon, but while many are beginning to question the wisdom of their last vote for president, poll after poll reveals that they are not particularly disposed toward Republicans. They may not like the direction of the Obama tide, but it doesn’t mean that they trust the life preserver tossed out by a party which spent like drunken sailors when they held the purse strings, either.

That presents a crucial problem of generating enough enthusiasm to assure high conservative turnout. The left will have its own problems on that score, but they do have the win on health care and the promise of more of the same to dangle in front of voters.

Clinton and Obama promised Democratic lawmakers that once health care passed, voters would reconcile themselves to it and Democratic fortunes would rise. They were wrong and right. According to Rasmussen, a fairly large majority of voters would like to see it repealed, but at the same time, its popularity has risen among Democratic voters. Democrats have something to fight for, while Republicans offer something to fight against. Historically, being against something without a positive plan has not augured well.

On the other hand, the emperor’s state of undress has finally become apparent to many. Even the press has begun to notice that its love is unrequited, that the administration loves only the reflection in its own magic mirror and prefers to control that carefully crafted image through its web site, friendly bloggers and social media. Like most jilted lovers, the press isn’t quite ready to believe in the callousness of its beloved yet: They whine about access to family outings in Hawaii while steadfastly ignoring the polar bears of a shaky economy, high unemployment and failing foreign policy that stalk the President’s tropical paradise.

For the press, it is but a crack in their reality; for many voters, the illusion shattered completely with the passage of the health care bill. Whether that will translate to a Republican sweep in November is questionable, but if the polar bears continue to multiply, perhaps it will result in the cancellation of the Obama show in 2012.

Funny you should put it that way, Mr. Gibbs: Why, yes, Republicans are attempting to slow down (so-called) progress on behalf of the American people. Someone has to act on our behalf, as the Democrats and the President have decided we should sit down, shut up and be grateful for their devastating largess.

“In my choice of words, I unfortunately gave the impression that I was maligning the Cambridge Police Department or Sergeant Crowley specifically,” Obama said, walking back his sharpest criticism.

But, the president said: “I continue to believe, based on what I have heard, that there was an overreaction in pulling Prof. Gates out of his home and to the station. I also continue to believe, based on what I heard, that Prof. Gates probably overreacted as well.”—“Obama walks back police criticism,” Burns & Lee, Politico.com

The god of glib toe-tickled his tonsils on Wednesday night. Teleprompter deprivation can have that effect, especially when a man given to elitism and liberal prejudices unwisely pontificates in ignorance.

Still, he might have saved the situation with two quick words: “I apologize.”

At least, he might have had he been an entirely different person, but Barack Obama apparently suffers from chronic Fonzie disease. The disease has three symptoms:

1. The inability to find the word “sorry” under “S” in his vast vocabulary;
2. spreading the blame; and
3. changing the subject.

All three were on display in his most recent comments. Of course, just because he doesn’t know how to say he’s sorry doesn’t mean he isn’t: He’s sorry 28 million people heard him vocalize his prejudices. He’s sorry for the media focus on his gaffe. He’s sorry he didn’t ram Obamacare through Congress months ago: It might have saved him the press conference and subsequent demonstration of his own pre-existing condition.

Is that why he supports this travesty of a health care bill? Who knows? Perhaps buried among the restrictions, stipulations and bureaucratic legalese is a clause that pays for a dose of humility.

As that’s an undisputed fact backed up by the media, we must assume that Joe Biden can’t possibly be suffering from Quaylitis; therefore, I had to come up with another theory to explain his case of political foot-in-mouth disease. I think I’ve found it in this quote from Politico:

And in a 2005 appearance on Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart,” Biden in an answer that was excerpted in the recent McCain ad, said that he “would be honored to run with, or against, John McCain, because I think the country would be better off — be well off no matter who …”

Stewart interrupted him, saying “Did I hear with?”

When Biden began to offer a noncommittal answer, Stewart pressed him.

“Don’t become cottage cheese, my friend. Say it.”

And Biden responded, “The answer is yes.”

There it is: Biden is living out a subconscious political fantasy of running with John McCain. How else to explain his recent “gird your loins” speech to a group of supporters?

I thought Dems didn’t believe in pre-emptive strikes, but that speech reads like a daisy-cutter designed to forestall a wholesale exodus of support when Obama is “tested” by the Big Bads after he is elected. The Obama camp’s attempt to spin it into nothing more than a general statement that any new president will be tested doesn’t pass the smell test: Biden was quite specific that they would test Obama precisely because he was young and inexperienced, neither of which adjective applies to John McCain.

To be fair to Biden: He did emphasize how brilliant and steel-spined his running mate is, even while imploring supporters not to turn tail and run when they see Obrilliance make a decision that doesn’t look quite right to them.

Frankly, I don’t think Biden has to anything to worry about with the group he was addressing. They are, after all, fundraisers, not likely to run even if North Korea launches against the Pacific Coast. (Oh, right. This was in Seattle. Maybe he should worry.)

Anyway, it’s the middle, that great Jello® of American politics, which jumps on whatever bandwagon seems to be most musical at the moment and will be equally quick to leap off at the first sour notes.

Still, his plea for understanding begs the question: Just what does Biden think his running mate will do that won’t appear to be the right answer “at first?” And how long are his supporters supposed to wait before they are allowed to judge the situation for themselves? Or are they allowed to do that? So much of the Obama campaign has been based in hope, one wonders. Or at least, one should.