Forget about the controversy surrounding Newsweek's latest cover, which depicts President Barack Obama as the Hindu god Shiva, let's take a look at the broader point the liberal magazine was making: that "the modern presidency may be too much for one person to handle."
Besides offending the entire Hindu religion (which frowns on the use of its deities for promotional purposes), Newsweek submits that with all the issues swirling around the Oval Office and the lack of substantial downtime upon which the president has to ruminate on them, no single person can handle it all. The writer contends, after consulting numerous presidential historians, that the office is just "too bloated."
While the piece, written by Daniel Stone, is an honest look at the Obama and George W. Bush administrations, it also lacks the proper balance, which an article of this breadth and magnitude should naturally include. In many ways, it comes across as a 2,087-word apology for the many mistakes, gaffes and errors in judgment that the Obama administration has made over the last two years.
Stone depicts the modern president (in this case, Obama) as an overwhelmed and exhausted executive who exudes a cool exterior but inwardly struggles with the unrelenting, ever-escalating demands of the office. Stone ends somewhat abruptly and inconclusively. "It's hard to imagine how the office could sizably shrink" he writes, before quoting a Boston College professor who says "Presidents ought to give more thought to their cabinet choices, and then give them a little more deference."
In fairness, this article is aimed specifically at the presidency, but Stone fails to look at the bigger picture and the chief executive's role in it. The reality is that the broad reach of the American presidency isn't the problem, but a symptom of a much larger problem: the staggering size and scope of the federal government.
There is no question Obama has had to deal with problems he didn't have a hand in creating and which no one could have foreseen, but in many ways he's helped to perpetuate the immeasurable list of bucks that stop with him by broadening the federal government even further.
One of the reasons conservatives look back on the second Bush presidency with relative ill regard (though they'd take it over the Obama presidency in a heartbeat) is because Bush expanded the size and scope of the executive branch by leaps and bounds. From the PATRIOT Act to the banking and auto bailouts, Bush's well-intended interventions created precedents that will last well into the future, and provided a foundation upon which future lawmakers can abuse with impunity, regardless of their political persuasion.
The United States was founded on the belief that government governs best when it governs least. The Constitution was written with the idea that overarching central authorities should yield to local communities on issues of local importance whenever possible. Certainly, this was a simpler time with simpler people leading simpler lives, but neither the complexity of our modern problems nor the ever-expanding growth of our modern population have anything to do with it. Local governmental bodies, such as states and municipalities, presumably know the general sentiments of their people, because the members of these bodies live among the people who are most affected by their decisions (Arizona's illegal immigration law comes immediately to mind).
If the federal government were to relinquish some of its authority and control, future presidents might find themselves with more time to think through a pressing national problem before making a crucial decision.
Obama may not be like Shiva -- the god Hindus believe will destroy the world -- but if he doesn't reign in the federal government soon, his administration could certainly put a dent in it.
Join Me on Facebook | Get My Twitter Updates 
Shiva Photo © DreamPictures/Getty Images/Riser Collection
Comments
THE PUBLISHER ”NEWSWEEK” HAD USED A RELIGIOUS FIGURE FOR COMMERCIALPURPOSE AND IT IS AN OFFENDING PICTURE AND IT HUMILIATES THE COMMUNITY.THIS IS NOT ONLY BEING OFFENSIVE TO HINDU BUT A CHEAP AND DEGRADING SALES GIMMICK. IT IS USING RELIGION FOR COMMERCIAL GAIN.
A few points:
Stating that Hindus don’t like to use gods for commercial exploitation is patently false. Many Indian companies use gods’ names and images to sell products in India. The issue at hand is the fact that this is a US publication using the image in a rather racialized and Orientalist manner to depict a living person. Imagine the state leader of a non-Christian nation being portrayed as Jesus on the cross.
Secondly, please don’t term Shiva as “the god Hindus believe will destroy the world” – that is a gross misstatement and misunderstanding of what the deity represents in Hinduism. In fact, the pose used by Newsweek (known as the Nataraja) represents Shiva’s dancing the world into existence.
Interesting input about the article, I enjoyed reading it – thanks for sharing your thoughts!
sv:
I sincerely hope you’re taking your criticism of my very brief Shiva description on the road with you and tearing into all those Hindu sites on the web that characterize Shiva as the destroyer of the world, because they are literally everywhere. Here’s one I found in under four seconds from SanatanSociety.org:
“Shiva is the god of the yogis, self-controlled and celibate, while at the same time a lover of his spouse (shakti). Lord Shiva is the destroyer of the world, following Brahma the creator and Vishnu the preserver, after which Brahma again creates the world and so on [emphasis mine].”
As for your characterization of the outrage at the Newsweek cover depicting Obama as Shiva, I’m afraid I once again must disagree with you. Here is the actual statement as it appeared in an article from Sify.com:
“Hindu statesman Rajan Zed, in a statement in Nevada (USA) today, said that Lord Siva [sic] was a highly revered major deity in Hinduism meant to be worshipped in temples or home shrines and not to be used indecorously or thrown around loosely in reimagined versions for dramatic effects [emphasis mine].”
Which would include promotional purposes.
Also, sv, not all Indians are Hindus. This might explain the anomaly to which you refer, and I would therefore caution you against ascribing such a xenophobic blanket statement to an entire race, nationality or group of people. It’s a gross misstatement and misunderstanding of the Indian people, and, frankly, it says more about your own inherent biases than mine. Incidentally, your Jesus comparison is inappropriate as relates to me because I’m not Christian although I do get your somewhat obtuse point.
But this is all beside the point, because none of what you have to say addresses the actual substance of my post. It would be great to hear your thoughts about whether the American presidency is too much for one person to handle, or if the entire basis for the Newsweek article is grounded in the belief that since it is too much for Obama to handle it must then be too much for anyone to handle (because, after all, Obama is in Newsweek’s words, the “God of All Things”). I believe I would enjoy reading your thoughts.
Selah.
I wish my fellow Hindus would all lighten up and take this depiction of Obama as Shiva as a flattering one. I don’t understand how it “insults” or “offends” Hindus – it’s just a tongue-in-cheek depiction of what Americans expected of our President – we expected him to be a God who could handle every problem this country has ever had. Obviously, he’s human and can’t do that and that’s the message Newsweek is trying to symbolize. They are describing Obama in a Hindu paradigm – be proud of that!
Come on fellow Hindus, we pride ourselves as being the oldest and most secure religion in the world and as the grandparent religion of the world we shouldn’t be offended or angered so easily by these light hearted depictions! Get a life! Don’t become like these other “younger” religions who are ready to fight at the drop of a hat! It’s so immature!
The Hindu gods are all demons.
The cover with the Hindu god exposes the liberal magazine’s own level of journalistic ethics.It would be scared of offending Muslims in the same way.But it is open season on another religion that does not threaten assassination of the editors.
I believe there is much more symbolism to President Obama being depicted as Shiva in the Newsweek magazine.
First & foremost, the date of issue of the magazine (Nov. 22) is interesting. It works to (11/22 = 11 + 22 = 33) which is a very significant date as far as World Globalists are concerned. For e.g., it was on Nov. 22, JFK was assassinated, which was sort of a ritual murder on the 33rd parallel.
Shiva is a destroyer as well as a transformer.
Remember, President Obama came to the office with “Change” (or “Transformation”) as his main campaign slogan. I believe, the globalists have put Obama in the office with a purpose. A country, which has been ruled by Whites for the past 230yrs, suddenly brings in a Colored president itself was a “Change”. In other words, it signifies the transformation of America. So depicting Obama as Shiva, in his dance of death posture, could very well signify a destroyer (in the Whitehouse) going to destroy the very foundations of America and what America stood for (Freedom). Everything about Obama sends a signal that we are drawing close to some big happenings.