Friday, November 16 , 2018, 3:56 am | Fair 47º


Mona Charen: White House Correspondents Dinner Shows Obama’s Improving His Act

“Personal charm may be Obama’s last best hope,” a headline read in the Washington Post on Monday. That charm was on ample display at the annual vanity fest called the White House Correspondents Association Dinner over the weekend.

The dinner always features two comedians — one professional, and the other the occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Skilled joke writers contribute the one-liners, but delivery counts, too, and President Barack Obama has clearly improved over the course of four years.

In 2009, some of his jokes were in bad taste. He said Dick Cheney was writing his memoirs, to be titled “How to Shoot Friends and Interrogate People.” While a few lines were amusing — addressing the media he said, “Most of you covered me and all of you voted for me” — the speech wasn’t top-drawer entertainment.

This year’s performance was better. The relaxed president demonstrated a mastery of timing, and the humor, if not quite self-deprecating, was disarming. He entered to rap music, and grinned that “Rush Limbaugh warned you: Second-term baby!” Noting that he has gone a little gray, the president acknowledged that when he looks in the mirror, he realizes, “I’m not the strapping, young, Muslim socialist that I used to be.” As I say, not self-deprecating, because he’s skewering his more fevered critics, not himself, but unquestionably entertaining.

The dinner arrived at an opportune moment. While the president has mastered the high art of giving his most devoted fans (the Washington press corps) a good time, events of the past couple of weeks demonstrate that he remains an amateur, or worse, at the rest of his job.

His signature initiative, Obamacare, was described by Democratic Sen. Max Baucus as “a huge train wreck.” Other increasingly queasy Democrats have complained to the White House about rate increases and regulatory burdens. “Democrats in both houses of Congress,” The New York Times reports, “said some members of their party were getting nervous that they could pay a political price if the rollout of the law was messy or if premiums went up significantly.”

The president’s transparent attempt to inflict pain on the country to validate his own extravagant predictions of doom regarding the sequester appears to have backfired. When the Federal Aviation Administration furloughed air traffic controllers rather than reducing, say, its travel budget or a $474 million grant program to “make communities more livable and sustainable” — public ire was turned not on Republicans but on the FAA. Congress passed and the president was obliged tamely to sign a law directing the FAA to make better decisions.

The president’s attempt to pass gun control legislation by relying solely on the “bully pulpit” was defeated. Obama vented his frustration at a foot stamping press conference that served only to highlight his ineffectiveness.

Obama’s foolhardy declaration of a “red line” in Syria regarding the use of chemical weapons has now come back to haunt him. Reluctance to intervene in Syria is a defensible policy, but the president painted himself into a corner by declaring that if Bashar al-Assad used certain weapons, the United States would act. With our allies’ intelligence agencies now confirming that such weapons have been used, the president’s bluff has been called. He may be forced to take action he believes to be unwise (and that may indeed be unwise) only because he boxed himself in. “I don’t bluff,” the president vowed in 2012 regarding Iran. Tehran is watching now. Everyone is watching.

The Boston bombing has revealed that the Obama administration’s priorities in the struggle against “workplace violence” and “overseas contingencies” have weakened us. The failure of the FBI and CIA to thwart Tamerlane Tsarnaev — despite warnings from Russia, his extremist comments in his mosque, his patronage of jihadi websites, and his travel to Dagestan — demonstrate that the guidance the administration is providing is dangerously wrong. It comes from the top. As Sebastian Gorka of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies put it, “The fact is religion has been expunged from counterterrorism training. The FBI can’t talk about Islam and they can’t talk about jihad.”

The results are dire. But at least everyone had a good laugh on Saturday night.

Mona Charen is a columnist with National Review magazine. Click here to contact her, follow her on Twitter: @mcharen, or click here to read previous columns. The opinions expressed are her own.

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made using a credit card, Apple Pay or Google Pay, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments and a mailing address for checks.

Thank you for your vital support.

Become a Noozhawk Supporter

First name
Last name
Select your monthly membership
Or choose an annual membership

Payment Information

Membership Subscription

You are enrolling in . Thank you for joining the Hawks Club.

Payment Method

Pay by Credit Card:

Mastercard, Visa, American Express, Discover
One click only, please!

Pay with Apple Pay or Google Pay:

Noozhawk partners with Stripe to provide secure invoicing and payments processing.
You may cancel your membership at any time by sending an email to .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click Here to Get Started >

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.