« Previous | Main | Next »

Listeners opposing the opposition of Obama

Post categories:

Cathy Packe | 12:04 UK time, Friday, 29 January 2010

Usually listeners to Over To You get in touch after they've heard a programme - but over the past few days we've had a number of emails from people complaining on the basis of what they've heard in a trail.

garyyounge_300.jpgOpposing Obama is a two-part series, presented by Gary Younge (pictured), which will run in the Monday documentary slot on the World Service on 1 and 8 February.

But the title of the programme - and the on-air trails - have been enough to get people leaping to the defence of the American president. You can hear some of their comments in this week's programme.

But we've decided to wait until the programmes themselves have gone out before we discuss them on air. So if you listen to either or both of them - and we hope you will - do let us know what you think.


Issues of non-faith

Many of the emails and calls we receive consist of criticism or complaint, so it was a pleasant surprise to read an email from a regular listener, Ulric Schollaert from Brussels, Belgium, praising a recent edition of Heart and Soul.

This, of course, is the programme that looks at religious belief.  But what Ulric particularly liked was that it featured people of no religious belief - secular Jews, who consider that they are Jewish, through birth, upbringing or whatever, but have no faith.

Ulric wanted to know if more atheists or non-believers might be heard on the programme in future - so, as you can hear in this week's Over To You, Rajan challenged the producer, Kristine Pommert, on the subject.

You can hear her reply on the programme - and Kristine has quite a vivid turn of phrase. 

"In a sports programme, for example, we wouldn't want to hear every Saturday before the football comes round, somebody who says I don't like football, it's boring." 

Which seems a fair point - although you may not agree.

Haiti emotion

And we also return to the subject of Haiti coverage in this week's programme.

Rajan's been talking to Mark Doyle, the BBC's International Development Correspondent, about the news coverage of the earthquake, and also about the challenges of separating the natural instincts of the reporter from feelings of personal sympathy for the victims of tragedy.

I hope you'll agree that it's an interesting listen.
   
Cathy Packe is the Producer, Over To You

Over To You is your chance to have your say about the BBC World Service and
its programmes. It airs at 10:40 and 23:40 every Saturday, and at 
02:40 on Sunday (GMT). 

Picture credit: Getty

Comments

  • Comment number 1.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 2.

    Dear Sir, When I heard the trailer of Opposing Obama, I was shocked that BBC had allowed itself to be used in this manner. Worst of all, you have stooped to new low by allowing a journalist to broadcast a program that is so one sided as his stated intention of visiting the two states in USA was to interview people who have an axe to grind with the US President. Your reputation of being an unbiased and world class news source is now in the dumpsw!!! Ask yourself, did you have a program call Opposing George Bush? or Opposing Clinton??? As far as I know there is no such programmes made in the past. Could you now have the moral courage to stand up and declare what BBC's agenda in allowing, no, promoting a programme that is so unshamedly biased? Do we detect racial bias in this as well? I am sorry to say I am so flabbergasted by your intention to air such a program - shame on you BBC. You have done the whole of Great Britain a great disservice!!!!

  • Comment number 3.

    Why would an impartial and supposedly impartial, professional BBC organization title and promote a program focused solely on "Opposition to Obama". Regardless of the content of the program why act in such a politically biased way. I am a 75 year old Brit and have listened to BBC with great admiration all of my life. I am disgusted at this biased and negative program interviewing selected individuals from Southern States that are notoriously racist. Shame on you BBC! The people behind this program are a cancer in the BBC family. They should definitely be encouraged to find another disreputable line of work. Your arrogance in airing the program without refocusing the content to “Opinions on Obama” regardless of the negative views of many of your most avid listeners is appalling.

    Ivan G.

  • Comment number 4.

    I can't remember feeling so incensed with the BBC before. Every time the offensive trailer for the anti-Obama programme came on air my disgust with the BBC reached new heights. Now I have heard the live programme in the 2 states and had to hear this trail of ignorance. Have the BBC people working on this programme no sense of shame?
    Despite taking over quite a bag of worms from the previous administration, President Obama has worked very hard to achieve improvements in the domestic arena and to fulfil promises made in the international sphere. The world has renewed respect for America. The last thing he needs is an insulting message from the BBC.

  • Comment number 5.

    With all due respect to the other comments in this blog, I must - as a British-born US citizen and resident - strongly disagree. "Opposing Obama" attempts to examine, in a way which no other journalistic organization has so far done, the virulent and often-times self-defeating hatred towards the President.

    Without a doubt, many of the opinions expressed by the people interviewed by Mr Younge are racist, foolish, and inherently contradictory. But this is precisely the reality that so many of us living in the United States deal with on a daily basis. To ignore this phenomenon will not make it go away. I applaud Mr Younge and the BBC for having the courage, respectively personal and corporate, to venture into the lions den of anti-Obama sentiment,

  • Comment number 6.

    Shame, shame, shame. This Special Report is a farce and cannot explain the recent elections in Massachusetts, Virgina and New Jersey where Obama-politics and Obama-cronies were on the ballot and soundly defeated by well-educated, economically-stable and center-left voters. How does the BBC explain this? The BBC does not and cannot. This BBC report was made with the supposition that all opposition to Obama was made by poor white and mainly southern, America. The opposition to Obama runs deeper than the BBC's attempt to use Southerns and poor-white Americans to continue the European-myth that white-Americans are barefoot racists unworthy of serious consideration. Shame, shame, shame.

  • Comment number 7.

    The "Opposing Obama - Part one" appears to me to be an accurate report on the nature of the people interviewed. It is a reality that is well reported and the people interviewed are being open and honest about how they see their situation. Yes, you heard racism. But get past that to the underlying plight: unemployment. Exploring and reporting takes a reporter to interesting places. The reality check is that for those two states, the economy is in a very bad situation. If it were better, you would see fewer negatives on Obama. I congratulate the report and look forward to the next one.

  • Comment number 8.

    President Clinton left the economy in a very acceptable state. President Bush heaped up the national debt, with in addition two on-going wars to fund. What was Mr McCain planning to do about unemployment and the national debt should he have won the election? Would President Obama have led the country into war if he had been in office 8 years ago, and with no plan for the consequences, particularly for impoverishing his own people? I think the BBC has bitten off more than it can chew in this case.

  • Comment number 9.

    The presentation says more about how out of touch with America Europe actually is than it does about racism in the U.S.

    I understand the BBC needs to attract listeners but the focus was far too racial and sensational. The fact is, that nearly every poll coming out says the majority of Americans do not agree with the president on an ideological basis. Framing this documentary in terms of race is regressive since we know that race not the primary reason for American disapproval of a president they elected one year prior. The tone of the documentary itself probably provides more insight into why the majority of Americans reject europeanisation in both media and government.

    Americans are much more individualistic than Europeans and this one-size-fits-all explanation is way out of touch with why the average American is uneasy about Obama.

  • Comment number 10.

    It's obvious why the educated leave the Southern states and move to more enlightened parts of the country or Europe. Unfortunately I still have relatives I will not talk to, for the same reasons that make this an interesting show. Or disturbing! How ever you want to interpret it.

    Yes, racism in the South is still prevalent, but slowly dying with the older generation who nibbled on lead base paint chips as children. Eventually the South will lose the majority of that KKK mentality.

    I feel if the interviews were done with a younger generation of adults, they would have given a better cross section of the populaces views on the issue in question.

    I didn't vote for Obama for the same concern that the gentlemen mention. Obama just doesn't have enough experience. But I support most of what he is trying to accomplish. We must understand that we will suffer for a be a good amount of time, before any changes will be seen from action taken now. We will suffer with Bush's totally inescapable idiocies for many years to come. But the change is taking place. The rural south is the last place it will take effect. If they even let change happen down there! The south has a long record of fighting change, growth and improvement . Many areas are no better of than a pre-earthquake Haiti.

    Hopefully you will visit, or have visited other parts of the States to get a real idea of what life and the changes are like.

    If nothing else your show has given meaning to the reasons my mother moved us out of rural Florida after my father died in the early 70's.

  • Comment number 11.

    In listening to Mr. Younge's program today, I didn't know if I should laugh out loud or scream in anger. First let me say I voted of President Obama, and while in general I support him, I can see where some folks might be frustrated with the administration's course so far. That being said.... couldn't Mr. Younge have found people other than stereotypical "Apalician-imbred-uneducated-racist-hicks" to present the case as to why people aren't happy with the President right now. After all it's not just "dumb white folks" that are suffering. As to the opposing view point presented: A black basketball coach? Really? How racist is that? But then of course, how silly of me....where else would you find a man of color? The whole thing is just bad reporting and it feeds into the idea that all Americans are simpletons.
    p.s. How's the scone?

  • Comment number 12.

    I was one of those that got upset every time I heard the trailer for this program. The trailer features a man who says that he has a copy of the USS Constitution in his pocket (the USS Constitution is a wooden-hulled, three-masted heavy frigate of the United States Navy) and it doesn't say anything about the government having the right to take over health care - every time I heard him speak I wondered if he knows that it doesn't say anything about women having the right to vote or own property either. There was also a man who says that Obama doesn't represent him...and I would think about how I felt that way about Bush for 8 years but I felt compelled to look over my shoulder and lower my voice before I said the words for fear I would be branded unpatriotic or worse.
    However, I decided to withhold judgement until I heard the piece and this morning I really tried to listen to the whole thing. But when the interviewer was talking to the man in the town that depended on coal mining for jobs and he said "I don't want to put words in your mouth, but it sounds like you are saying that things have gotten worse since Obama came into office" I cut off the show. I feel like BBC is turning into a UK version of Fox News - and I refuse to watch Fox News. For goodness sake, the WHOLE WORLD has had increased unemployment since Obama took office - will BBC try to blame that on him, too?

  • Comment number 13.

    I've just heard the first part of the documentary and thought it was great. I don't get the bias argument that people are complaining about because Gary Younge is very pro-Obama and I think tackling this issue head on is the way forward.
    Going to places like Floyd County is a breath of fresh air, that's the real america and so often either belittled or ignored by broadcasters, and it can only be good that we hear these people's views.
    I am from Birmingham, UK, but went and volunteered for Barack Obama in Miami, and although a liberal city, there was a unhealthy minority that were visceral in their hatred of Obama, whether it be joking he will get killed or calling myself a 'N-loving Baby-Killer'. So needless to say in places like Kentucky this feeling will be replicated.
    One thing that annoyed me about coverage of the election is that it seems obvious that Obama was going to win but in reality it was a miracle he won and was touch and go for most of the campaign.
    Keep up the good work Gary and the BBC, my only dissapointment is that it is not more of an in depth series.

  • Comment number 14.

    opposing obama, why wasn't it opposing george bush when he sent soldiers to fight in iraq for weapons they haven't found yet, or in england it self tony blair for supporting him ,i mean i love the bbc i listen it every night and when i heard opposing obama i just had to say something , i live in the twin island of trinidad&tobago yeah one might say obama has no direct bearing on me but at the same time people give the guy a chance its just one year ,did you judge george bush both jr an senior after one year? NO, did you do it to tony blair? NO, so why obama to me its just racial stereotyping sorry buts that just how i see it

  • Comment number 15.

    As a liberal democrat, I would dearly love to better understand what the other side is thinking in order to improve communication and search for workable solutions. I objected to the tone of the trails which were broadcast so frequently it felt like propaganda - shear repetition to convince us that Obama has "done NOTHING" of value. I listened to the program anyway, but did not learn anything useful. I did not catch any specifics as to what he was supposedly doing wrong and what he should be doing instead, just complaints about the present situation which is actually the results of Bush's policies, not Obama's. Personally I think Obama is a breath of fresh air but not nearly powerful enough with the bully pulpit. America needs a national goal that can galvanize the citizenry the way the space race did in the 60's. A clean energy race would do wonders to spur innovation and job growth as well as to improve the health of the public and the environment. Even if global warming is a false alarm (which I don't believe), dealing with the possibility can only be beneficial to all. We should be dealing with all those climate issues anyway - even if we knew for sure that sea levels won't become critical and all the other dire predictions were exaggerated. I digress.
    My point is that opposition without constructive objections and suggestions is nothing more than negativity which always exists regardless of who is in charge. Please report on constructive opposition rather than simply complainers who can not be satisfied.

  • Comment number 16.

    Listeners would not know from the broadcast that the vote in Floyd County, Kentucky, changed from 66 percent for Gore in 2000 to 62 percent for John Kerry in 2004, to just under 50 percent for Barack Obama in 2008. This last change was significant but was NOT of earthquake-like proportions.
    Bill Clinton got 71 percent in 1992 and 67 percent in 1996. Does the decline in the vote for the Democrat between 1992/96 and 2000/04 have the same cause, racism, that your correspondent saw in the continuing decline in support for the Democrat this year? Of course not.
    In any event about 50 percent of Floyd County DID vote for Obama. We hardly heard from them.
    It would have been preferable for the BBC to present a more nuanced view of the vastly more interesting question of how and why opposition to President Obama has increased during the past year -- as opposed to rehashing the views of those who opposed him more than a year ago, and who in any event reflected the views of only about half of the voters in Floyd County.
    Mr. Younge's biases are revealed when he brings us to Arkansas, as he notes, with evident regret -- and what else could this expression mean -- that there "the political landscape is all too familiar". Apparently the only political landscape worthy of Mr. Younge's approval is one which delivers a strong majority vote, year after year, for the Democrats.

  • Comment number 17.

    I would like to say that I object to the BBC's title OBAMA'S AMERICA, as though the president is a royal dictator of OUR country. AMERICA is the country of ALL Americans not just Barack Obama. Our country was founded as a democracy where we have the right to "oppose Obama". Your title OPPOSING OBAMA makes it sound as though Americans who do not agree with the president's policies and the way he's trying to carry them out are wrong or perhaps racist. For years your reporting has been objective where other news outlets were not but it seems that now you are just one more like the majority of the US news outlets. How about a detailed program on Obama's policies and the manner that he's using to carry them out from the point of view of conservatives? Your reporting thus far about his views and the way they are being executed leaves out information that is important to a large portion of the population, for example I haven't heard you report anything about the president's views on late term abortions. You have also not reported about the way that job creation is being smothered by the president's increases in spending and taxes. We who oppose Obama's policies have reasons which we believe are good. Please BBC. Give this topic more of the objectivity you have been known and loved for.

  • Comment number 18.

    The USA is having a nervous break-down. There is little doubt of that. The election of Obama has caused politically-seismic events. I have witnessed the election of 7 Presidents and have never heard their "legitimacy" as President questioned. That phenomenon itself is cause for a reassessment of their nation's continued validity. For while it might have been able to stay "united" for over 230 years; we now are living in significantly different times! I do not believe that the "center" can continue to hold. For I believe that it will either split in half or into quadrants along geographical lines; or into a much looser political configuration. The experience of my nation of Canada should show that the "center" of any nation cannot stay static; for it must move to adequately address the needs of its parts. That has worked, so far, for a nation of roughly 32 million people. Whether it could work for a nation 10 times the size is very problematic. In the long-term I cannot see the USA remaining as it now is, period!

  • Comment number 19.

    Since his election President Obama and his political party have been facing sharp criticisms and some unfounded opposition. To my mind, what Mr. Younge is attempting to accomplish with his report, is a first hand account of why citizens are taking these positions against Pres. Obama. By speaking directly to a few polarized groups, it gives the listener a chance to understand their frame of mind. Unfortunately in this country, the news networks tend to be biased and present a carefully crafted representation of the truth. Whilst this report focuses on Southern individuals, it does present the growing concern against the governing party. Mr. Younge's report is not intended to promote a single point of view on President Obama, rather an explanation for why the United States is undergoing its current transformation.

    Ultimately, the two party system is not practical in the 21st century. It's unfathomable that the vast majority of one's beliefs are to align on a singe end of the political spectrum. Opposing Obama is providing the journalism that one cannot obtain in the US.

  • Comment number 20.

    I found "Opposing Obama" to be an accurate look at the way many americans see our president. Americans rarely embrace social change eagerly. FDR's New Deal, social security, rural electrification, and civil rights were all called "socialist" when they were introduced. After eight years of Bush & Co. selling "American Exceptionalism" and "it's us vs. them" the arrival of Obama shocked and frightened many conservatives. A liberal black man with a "suspicious" name upset them so they looked for reasons to justify their feelings. "Non-American","socialist",& "soft on terror" became their rational. Right-wing commentators picked up the theme and fed it back to them, confirming the fears because "if they heard it on Fox it must be true". When the economy shows real growth that benefits average Americans the critisms will be muted.

  • Comment number 21.

    With all due respect to anti-tax protesters, fundamentalist Christians and libertarians, country club members and local dignitaries living in rural Arkansas and Kentucky, the opinions expressed in this documentary perspective are skewed from the get go.

    How about asking someone from a blue state, for instance one in the Pacific Northwest.

    Geeeeesh, this is not what I expected from a respected news organization like BBC!

  • Comment number 22.

    Re Opposing Obama. Having heard OTY today and the complaints about this programme, I would really like to weigh in on its side. I actually dislike the multiple trails for any programme, but accept that these are necessary given usual “dip in/out” listening patterns.
    I found the programme excellent and the presenter extremely knowledgeable, clearly able to get sometimes frighteningly honest replies out his interviewees, particularly when he got the Democratic Party candidate squirming on the hook and finally admitting that having the President support his own campaign would not be helpful. As Gary said he had spotted a trend, fast becoming a movement, and for those of us across the Pond it shed some real light on what is happening to a society that is very important for all of us in Europe, particularly given the sort of geopolitical upheavals the world seems to be facing. It was extremely scary I might add, but we do need to try to understand it.
    The complaints about bias and the need for balance only apply to news reporting. Documentaries obviously come from a certain viewpoint often to test a certain hypothesis by documenting the findings and as such, in this case introducing irrelevant voices from other parts of the US and other social groups would just have muddied the waters.
    The second programme was even more illuminating since it widened the frame of reference to this rising tide of opinion in certain parts of the US that seems to express disillusion with the whole political system, again scary, but necessarily informative.
    Congratulations Gary, and hope to hear from you again.

  • Comment number 23.



    hey everybody calm down ..

    its not the BBC who is biased or 1 sided, its the people they interviewed ..

    i cant believe you all turned so easily against the BBC ..

    i thought it was a great insight into the angry right of america ..

    with clinton and bush the other side just grumbled a bit but just went on as usual .. here we have a black man in charge, and as stated in part 1+2 race is an issue. especially with the tea party it seems, all white 50 somthings complaining that the right is not right enough ..

    i cant believe the various women ranting on about no time to be moderate, thats 1 of americas main problems, not being moderate ..

    they dont seem to mind spending trillions not being moderate - starting wars in the middle east killing thousands of innocents, but ask them for some cash to give their fellow citizens better health care end education and they all go crazy

    also many still think he Obama is a muslim, what a shock ..

    they support FOX because of their fair reporting, frightening ignorance ..

    and that woman going on about equal rights not equal things??? stealing their wealth?? what does that even mean??? i dont even think she knows ..

    and lost liberties - its the right that took them away in the first place after 911

    short memories people ..

    they want conservatives huh, what like GW bush, great,

    dont worry people its just a report highlighting a percentage of the US population that thinks a certain way ..

    its called democracy ..

    and finally this little gem ..

    its the greatest country on gods green earth and we will not apologize for our extremism in defending it ..

    and last but not least

    you guys are making one important mistake in all this, actually taking these people seriously enough to berate the BBC

    mark brisbane australia


  • Comment number 24.

    Absolutely fascinating. I certainly got an entirely different impression from the "Opposing Obama" adverts/trailers than most of the folks who have posted here.

    I just kind of rolled my eyes and thought, "Well, here comes another hatchet job. Looks like someone's going to interview a bunch of knuckleheads and let them say stupid things so that all Americans look stupid . . . again." I am fascinated that anyone could hear those advertisements and think that the documentary would be a two-part criticism of Obama. I expected it to be the opposite: a two-part exploration of the weird, small-but-loud segment of people I have to deal with on a daily basis.

    Come on - aren't any of you folks overseas curious about the people who don't support Obama? Don't you want to know what makes them tick? Well, I am *not* interested in hearing (more) from these folks. I guess that most people who oppose Obama are polite and avoid speaking about politics at work, at the gym, etc. However, I only ever hear from the impolite folks, and what they have to say is pretty outrageous - kinda like the extreme anti-Bush crowd for the last eight years. Can't say I needed a documentary to hear from these guys again, but maybe you folks overseas might want to hear it.

    In America, the top-rated news networks are CNN and Fox. Watch them for 2 hours or so and you will understand what my life is like, why I rarely discuss politics with my fellow Americans, and why I listen to the BBC like a man who flees a fire to get some fresh air.

    I live in an echo chamber. Many Americans seek out broadcasts and websites that support what they themselves already believe, and then they repeat these views to each other and anyone who will listen. (Who knows - maybe it's the same way where you live?) They also repeat these things to broadcasters - even BBC documentary makers - who re-broadcast this as news to those very same people, thus completing the cycle. They also have a tendency to talk to the side of my head at work as I am trying to get something productive done and ignore them.

    But no, not all of the people who are opposed to Obama are idiots, rednecks, or racists. There are actually a lot of people who (1) do not claim to be experts on economics, military strategy, and health care (2) understand that it is unreasonable to ascribe king-like powers to one man and expect him to fix these three problems overnight and (3) want you to come to our country to hang out with us and have fun. I live in the American South. I am not a Democrat or a Republican. I can not think of one person who could sort out this country's problems any better than Obama, who is merely the leader of one of our three branches of government. I have tried to stay informed and am not narrow-minded.

    I listened to the "Oppose Obama" documentaries. They're thankfully not what I was expecting. What I can't understand is how anyone who actually listed to both parts could come away thinking that the program was a one-sided slander of Obama. If anything, it was a platform for making the anti-Obama crowd look like idiots. I am a little bummed at this portrayal of Americans, but it also the truth - I know people who think that Obama faked his birth certificate. The minister at my in-laws' church all but called Obama the anti-Christ last year. This is an unfortuante aspect of life in a Southern university town: there are a lot of misinformed country folk and a lot of people who spend a good part of their lives saying really mean things to misinformed country folk.

  • Comment number 25.

    Henry Kissenger recently said of Obama that he was like "a chess Grandmaster with a half dozen simultaneous opponent, and unable to close out any one match". He is trying to accomplish too much and is simply unable to bring any one to a positive conclusion. From my perspective he hadn't a clue what he was getting into when he moved into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. If he had a decade's more experience after coming to Washington, making him more familiar with the maelstrom that defines its inner workings he might stand a chance. But as I see it, he's a one term president, and heaven help us with whoever replaces him.
    The reason I didn't vote for him and the reason I don't support him is the history of Chicago politics and those who are spawned by it. I just don't trust any of them.

  • Comment number 26.

    The American population has elected an Intellectual President, who also seems to have a large degree of common sense!

    Regrettably, the population does not yet understand.

    I know that the American people did not elect G. Bush the first time, but how could they elect him for a second term?

    To my mind, President Obama is treading a difficult path to try and restore the damage done to America’s credibility by Bush.

    A minority of U.S. citizens have passports or have travelled outside the U.S. The majority live in a cocooned environment and have no idea of the real world.

    America is the accepted leader in technology. How come America is so religious when their own technology casts major doubts on their beliefs???

    The only answer the opposition has to Pres. Obama seems to be Sara Palin.

    Let the Republican’s ‘God’ help them!!!!

  • Comment number 27.

    The BBC has managed to find the least educated most bigoted quarter of 1 percent of the U.S. population to suggest that there is some great groundswell of Obama opposition growing. Bull!

    These interviewees have about as much sway over the direction of this country as a fly riding an elephant. Will Obama be successful? I don't know. He has a lot of knuckleheads and do-nothings to romance in congress. But he was by far the better choice over McCain, who picked Paris Hilton in flannel for a running mate, and George "Elmer Fudd" Bush.

    It takes a U.S. President one year to unravel the policies of their predecessor, another year to put new policies in place, and another 12 to 18 months for those policies to show promise or failure. Until then only the ignorants and bigots should have anything to say.

    President Obama is the first president I have been enthusiastic about since Ronald Reagan.

  • Comment number 28.

    Dear Sir:
    I listened to your program "Opposing Obama" today and was thoroughly incensed. Your program seemed to characterize opposition to Obama as being a sign of mental instability, racism and backwardness and completely ignore the reasonable concerns of millions of Americans troubled by the direction in which the US is being lead. It was lazy journalism and beneath the standards I have come to expect from the BBC. I had no doubt that the presenter had a clear idea of where he was going with this program and was not going to allow his prejudices to be questioned by people who don't happen to be poor, underpriviledged and racist. It was the equivalent of visiting Belfast in the mid 70s and asking unemployed people why they don't like Margaret Thatcher. There are educated, thoughtful people all over the country who could have presented opposition to Obama on grounds of federalism, concerns about the economy, nervousness about Obama's lack of administrative experience, questionable background that would have made for a more interesting and relevant program.

 

More from this blog...

Latest contributors

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.