As I had noted back in March, the New York Times reported that Barnard college had announced in February that "Jill Abramson, the executive editor of The New York Times, would be its graduation speaker. But those plans changed" when the White House called the university and asked that President Obama be invited to deliver this year’s commencement address, in an effort to boost his poll numbers among women voters.
Now, the mere fact that the White House would even call the university to offer up Obama as the commencement speaker is unsettling. But for the White House to push Jill Abramson aside, so that the President can boost his poll numbers among women voters, is beyond the pale, albeit not beyond Obama's pale.....
Truth be told, the President's poll numbers among women voters should have taken a hit as a result of this incident, but sadly, the story was kept under the radar, because, well, because it reflects poorly on Obama, the Messiah-in-Chief.
Nevertheless, it is highly doubtful [inconceivable] that the Bush administration would have asked Barnard College to invite Mr. Bush to deliver the commencement address. And George W. Bush most certainly would have never agreed to speak if it entailed giving Jill Abramson the boot.
But of course, Obama is Obama, and in his world of "social justice", the end justifies the means. Besides, Abramson is a woman, and misogynists would never dare to push off their own political aspirations because of a lowly female!