Christopher Cervantes
[email protected]

If there is one truth in politics, it is that it is impossible to please everyone. For every pleased constituent, there are three more who are displeased with the choice. The dissatisfied parties are detrimental to the reputation of a well-known individual, for they will criticize and pick at an issue until it is nothing but bare bones. This occurrence will attract many, and it will refuse to die down for several weeks.

We have an example of this in Texas, when 14-year-old student Ahmed Mohamed brought his engineering project to school. His project, a homemade digital clock, led to his being interrogated by the police for over an hour and then being led away in handcuffs. School officials saw this as a potential bomb threat. Police determined that the clock and Ahmed were not a threat and released the teen to the custody of his parents. Ahmed, who is Muslim, was then invited to the White House by President Obama as a way to (apparently) make up for racial profiling.

For the past week, critics have been targeting both the school as well as the president for their choices concerning the issue. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton tweeted out her support of the boy, saying, “Assumptions and fear don’t keep us safe — they hold us back.” On the opposite side of the spectrum, Bristol Palin criticized Obama, and stated, “This is the kind of stuff Obama needs to STAY out of. This encourages more racial strife that is already going on with the ‘Black Lives Matter’ crowd and encourages victimhood.” These are just a few of the many comments that have been made. That raises the question on whether the president did the right thing, given the circumstances.

First and foremost, for people to blame the school is completely unneeded. When a child is put into the care of an educational facility, it is then the responsibility of the school and the teachers. If the clock were to be completely ignored, then it would be an act of irresponsibility on the staff’s part. If anyone should face any blame, it is on procedural grounds.

Second, Obama is walking a very thin line at the moment, a line that has been firmly drawn in the ground. If this is some type of political agenda on the president’s part, then it is timed coincidentally toward the end of his term and right when his potential replacements are gaining political steam. If this were the case, then the invitation would be a selfish tool in the political game. However, if there is no merit to this, then it is more likely that the president is acting on either self-preservation, or prevention.

Palin mentioned racial strife in her critique, and there have been several incidents sparking racial tension throughout this last year. Obama seems, in all honesty, to be acting out of a desire to counteract and prevent yet another incident. No president wants to be known for racial tensions.

What happened to Ahmed was unfair. Obama inviting him to the White House was a kind gesture, but it was an unnecessary one. It has caused more trouble than it has rectified.