Nuclear concerns and overseas issues are amongst the most important themes discussed in relation to the head of state in the New York Times on the week of 10th-17th April 2010 (cooper and landler). His meetings with various world leaders and prime ministers of different countries are highlighted and his foreign policy issues discussed. President Obama is reported as having played host at the White House to Mr. Karzai, Afghanistan’s president.
He (Obama) in addition, met the president of China, Mr. Hu at some point in the nuclear meeting being held in the capital city and leaders of two other countries that gave up nuclear arsenal (cooper and landler). He also created time to speak to the leaders of two other countries constructing hazardous nuclear arsenal. The president held separate sessions with the prime minister of India and Pakistan, discussing the upsurge in nuclear equipment.
Several biases come into sight from the media with regards to president Barrack Obama. The president is portrayed as not being more often than not very welcoming and sociable to international guests in the White House.
The president’s demonstration of warmth and interest towards a visiting overseas assignee is seen as very unusual. The Afghan president won four additional years in administration, and Mr. Obama is depicted by the media as having no choice other than to work together with him for the reason that he will be present for a longer moment in time (Cooper and Landler).
The New York Times imply that the president has been making an attempt not to behave like or be compared to the former head of the U.S, George Bush, as a substitute of directing efforts in his policies. He has used up fifteen months in addressing the problems and tribulations Bush left at the time that he was President.
This means that he has just started working on some of his personal policies. The president is seen at the same time as to be looking for ways to exude strength, which he apparently lacks overseas. He is portrayed as a fragile leader who is not only inexperienced in matters related to overseas supremacy and policies but also lacks the ability to influence.
He requires extra months or possibly years exuding confidence in his responsibility as a global head. In general, he does not exhibit closeness and comfort in the company of global leaders. Issues of human, legal rights and equality backup are not demonstrated as his main concern. His visualization for overseas courses of actions are at times considered impractical.
Presidential proceedings and dealings give the impression of generating the prevalent part of the news paper. This is evident in reporting the discussions on nuclear issues with other countries; furthermore, the president’s discussion with the republicans and the democrats is equally illuminated.
It is not forgotten that he was in the company of leaders from India and Pakistan, prior to attending a conference with leaders of other nations to talk about methods of keep artillery of mass destruction out of the control of rebels. The likelihood of a terrorist country being in possession of nuclear armaments is the most significant danger to the U.S. The president had a personal conference with Pakistan’s prime minister to make aid in stopping the manufacture and distribution of nuclear components.
The media covers the largest part of key issues concerning the U.S. presidency, but from time to time it fails to aid in administration by reporting irresponsibly. The actions of republicans affect governance yet they are not exposed as required. Consider: they frustrate efforts on the policy on Wall Street, despite the fact that one vote from the Republicans is required to pass the policy. They have been asked to take sides with regard to issues facing Wall Street.
The U.S. administration is seen as no longer paying focus to the fraud issues in Afghanistan. They seem to be softening their position on fraud in an effort to enhance relations between the two countries (cooper and landler). The government is paying more attention on the mishandling of foreign aid money at the local level, a shift anticipated to guard the weak link connecting the two countries.
The president is handled differently by the media. Every so often, he is treated well; at times he is criticized for his actions. The president’s answerability in his income is portrayed effectively by the media. He has publically exposed his monthly income; furthermore, he reportedly donated all his Prize earnings with regard to Nobel Peace directly to aid organization.
The president is criticized for his unreliability in important issues within the constraints of White House. The media makes the president appear weak in issues relating to associations both with congress, at home and with overseas associates.
The president’s home and overseas policies try to enhance protection of American public consequently upholding their welfare. His domestic policy on health is an excellent one. Putting the wellbeing of Americans and miniature businesses under their control is remarkable change.
A policy empowering the general public to be extra watchful of their physical, mental state and dropping the costly expenses of conforming to medical cover is on the offing. The Wall Street policy alterations is viewed as an approach to ending bailouts and get liability and responsibility for giant banks. It will also give power to shareholders, clients, and several neighborhood banks (cooper and landler).
The petroleum policy will be of assistance in improving the financial system with regard to fuel consequently trimming down greenhouse emissions from automobiles in the U.S. The policy on closing the detention center at Guantanamo bay and avoiding torture has aided the justice process. It is not forgotten that the approach with regards to dealing with global nuclear menace seeks to put off attack by terrorists.
Keeping nuclear artillery out of the hands of terrorists is important. A number of added policies to make certain energy security will encourage production in America. Policies which fight global warming and related changes are indeed for the good of the entire globe. The accomplishment of domestic policies in the long run boosts the support and collaboration with associates for overseas policies.
His correlation with the congress ensures that the policies being planned and implemented have a wide-range and extensive support that makes them easy to implement. Congress can choose to pass or fail to pass these presidential policies depending on its relationship with the president. The congress and the president negotiate if a course of action will be contentious or publically acknowledged. Their functioning as one signifies harmony and creates a more secure government (cooper and landler).
Work Cited
Cooper, Hellen and Landler, Mark. “U.S. Now Trying Softer Approach toward Karzai” New York Times. Web.