Ebola and the Islamic State: this election's October surprises

The president’s largely ineffective responses to the threats of Ebola and the Islamic State have battered his approval ratings and made it harder for Democrats to swim away from his sinking ship.

Harrison McClary/Reuters
James Knight of US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases trains US Army soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault), who are earmarked for the fight against Ebola, before their deployment to West Africa, at Fort Campbell, Ky., on Thursday. The US military is ramping up its response to the Ebola outbreak in West Africa, where it has already killed more than 3,400 people in Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Guinea.

What do the American people really care about?



Federal spending?

Minimum wage?  Income inequality?  Social security?  Jobs?

The midterm elections?  (That was a joke by the way. Nobody cares about the midterm elections, except for the candidates and their extended families)

None of the above.

The American people care only about the Islamic State (IS), also known as ISIS or ISIL, and Ebola.

I betcha if you did some sort of quantitative survey, the No. 1 and No. 2 that inquiring minds click on has to do with the newest terrorist threat coming from the Middle East and the newest version of the Black Plague coming from Africa.

IS and Ebola dominate the headlines, kind of like Notre Dame has dominated the Naval Academy in football over the last six decades.

In the Age of Anxiety, the average American believes the worst about these two threats.

Some conservatives believe that Ebola is flying over the border and think that the president is allowing this to happen to undermine America.

Louis Farrakhan thinks that Ebola is a white man’s plot to kill black people.

IS's beheading of a couple of journalists has crystallized the threat of Muslim extremism more than any other single event in the last five years.

It has even inspired a debate on Real Time with Bill Maher.

Maher thinks that the bombing campaign is counter-productive but thinks that the threat of Islamic extremism is not taken seriously by liberals.

Ben Affleck, the mouthpiece of the liberals, basically thinks that the HBO comedian is a racist and called him out on his show.

The bigger point is that IS has attracted the attention of Hollywood, Main Street, and Peoria perhaps more than anything other than Ebola.

These are our twin October surprises.

The president’s largely ineffective responses to both have battered his approval ratings and made it harder for Democrats to swim away from his sinking ship.

It’s so bad that Leon Panetta, David Axelrod, Robert Gibbs, Hillary Clinton and a host of others are taking pot shots not at John Boehner or Mitch McConnell, but at the president himself.

None of this bodes very well for the president’s party when the election rolls around next month.

And lest you forget, there’s an election next month.

John Feehery publishes his Feehery Theory blog at http://www.thefeeherytheory.com/.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Ebola and the Islamic State: this election's October surprises
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today