President Obama’s series of televised appearances has done precisely what is was designed to do. It distracted America from the crisis at hand and marketed the president’s policies to a jaded, skeptical nation.His appearance on “The Tonight Show” recalled his campaign days, when all he had to do was show up on late night television and plug himself for the presidency.Obama feels the need to market himself, especially given his recent drop in approval ratings. Apparently, the hype that surrounded Obama during his campaign has not translated into reality. Internet blogs speculate this occurrence is mostly because of Obama’s economic policies.It’s likely Obama is disenchanted and seeks to repair his image — and he is doing it the only way he knows how. He is essentially hitting the campaign trail again. But this time he isn’t seeking votes. He is seeking to impress and sucker the public into buying his economic plan.The president’s campaign style bleeding into his presidency has not escaped the attention of political analysts. “It’s part campaign-style politics and part ‘American Idol,'” said political strategist Simon Rosenburg of Obama’s media blitz last week.Speaking of “American Idol,” Obama bumped that show from its slot last Tuesday to make way for his own address to the nation.There’s nothing wrong with the president bumping “American Idol” if he has something of merit to say. The overall consensus, however, was the president simply maneuvered his way into a prime television spot to pitch a series of jumbled ideas and make defensive responses to reporters who asked tough questions.The Associated Press released a fact check after the president’s speech and reached the consensus that the speech was not only devoid of substance, but actively contradicted itself. They concluded the president’s economic strategy did “not fit quite so neatly with his bullish budget.”Apparently, the AP could not understand how the president plans to cut the deficit in half by increasing spending and expanding federal programs. Essentially, its critique was simply a refined way of accusing the president of being incapable of understanding basic mathematics.Obama would do well to focus on internal communications as well, rather than courting a suspicious public. Perhaps a strengthened internal dialogue would’ve caught the AIG bonus provision written in the original AIG bailout plan before it became media fodder.Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., made provisions for these bonuses, which means the federal government knew what was going on beforehand.The government is to blame for these bonuses.  Anger should be directed at them, not AIG, which was technically correct in using taxpayer money for bonuses.  If our government is sincere about stopping such “corruption” as it claims to be, perhaps it would be prudent for it to focus inward and quit pointing fingers at the blameless.Finger pointing is a sign of desperation. So is overexposure.If Obama’s economic plan is a good idea, then why does he feel he must try so hard to sell it? If the government truly isn’t to blame for the AIG bonuses, then why are they rabidly pointing fingers at every opportunity?This string of media blitz is nothing more than a flashy carnival designed to throw dust in the face of the American people to distract them with misplaced hate for AIG, misguided awe for their president and a contradictory economic plan devoid of logic.This overexposure isn’t an attempt to reassure the American people. It’s a sign of the underlying desperation that has gripped our government and will soon grip our nation.Linnie Leavines is an 18-year-old mass communication freshman from Central City.—-Contact LInnie Leavines at [email protected]