Some thoughts on Obama's second inauguration

   Like a lot of Americans, I took time out on Monday to sit and watch President Barack Obama's inauguration festivities. Since this blog basically began five years ago with my thoughts on his first inauguration, I thought I would take time today to give my impressions on his second.
   1. This inauguration, though it had much of the same pageantry as Obama's first celebration four years ago, was missing something. Four years ago, there was a sense of excitement in the air, a feeling that we were witnessing something historic with the inauguration of this nation's first black president. Four years ago, there was a feeling of hope, a fundamental belief that things were going to get better. Today, that hope has largely been dashed against the rocks of harsh reality.
   While the stock market continues to set new five-year highs, millions of people remain unemployed and uninsured. Instead of coming together as a nation to address our problems, we remain a nation divided along party lines, more interested in being right and gaining power than in addressing our very real, very serious problems. That initial sense of hope we felt with Obama's inauguration four years ago has largely been replaced with disappointment, if not outright disillusionment.
   2. Obama has aged some since he took office in 2009. He's a little grayer. Still, I thought he looked remarkable when compared to how George W. Bush looked as he left Washington at the end of his second term. The presidency has traditionally been unkind to those who hold the office. It ages a person, being the most powerful person on Earth and having the weight of the world squarely on your shoulders. When last we saw the younger Bush four years ago, he looked ancient. He looked completely wrung out by the pressures of the job.
   By contrast, Obama looks relatively fresh. He looks like he still has a bit of spring left in his step. The question is, will he be able to handle the pressures of the next four years? Or will the job age him, just as it has done for just about every one of his predecessors?
   3. Former President Bill Clinton was clearly in his element on Monday. He looked like he was having a ball. And why not? Clinton is clearly the most powerful, influential person in his party, as well as the most popular. He is a modern-day "king maker." Without Clinton, Obama would have lost the general election. The truth is, he was floundering until the Democratic Convention, when Clinton, with one speech, did a better job of making the case for Obama's reelection than the candidate himself had done up to that point.
   A lot of Americans don't like Clinton. A lot of us remember the absolute sewer the presidency was dragged through because of his affair with Monica Lewinsky and the ensuing impeachment. But it cannot be denied that the man is a brilliant politician. He is arguably the most gifted politician this country has seen in the past half century. And it cannot be denied that without his endorsement, this election would have had a very different outcome.
   4. I thought Obama's inaugural address was brilliant. A lot of people in the last couple days have criticized the president for the political nature of his speech. But I liked how he focused on the need for bipartisanship and the necessity of us all working together to address our problems. I was also quite pleasantly surprised that he put the spotlight on the issue of equality for ALL Americans, especially for gay Americans. It was a bold move made by a president who is clearly looking at his legacy.
   Personally, I think the criticism that Obama's speech was too political is disingenuous. Presidents, from the beginning, have used inaugural addresses to lay out their agenda for the next four years, and Obama is no different. I thought his speech struck the perfect balance between pragmatic (this is what I'm going to do) and statesman-like. No complaints from me.
   5. The whole controversy over whether singer Beyonce sang the national anthem live or used a pre-recorded track is ridiculous, and it has gotten entirely too much coverage in the media. Look, we all know the woman can sing. She's been in the spotlight since she was a child.
   This is not a repeat of the Milli Vanilli scandal, where the two singers not only DIDN'T sing their own music, but COULDN'T sing, and still sold millions of records, even winning a Grammy. So what if she used a pre-recorded track? It was her voice doing the singing. She's not the first to do it (assuming she did), and she won't be the last. And really, considering that she was singing in front of not only a nationwide, but a worldwide audience, can any of us really blame her if she wanted perfection?
   Whether she was live or Memorex, the continued focus on this only shows how obsessed our nation has become with frivolous entertainment. We have real, serious problems in this country. To spend so much time worrying about whether Beyonce sang live or not only shows how skewed our priorities have become as a nation. How sad.