It always amazes me the way in which we see things.  Some would want us to see things through their eyes, while others with an opposing viewpoint would like people to see things through their eyes.  Some see the glass half empty while others see the glass half full — how often have we heard that overworked cliche’?   Obama says he wants we the people just to see things with complete ‘transparency’.  However, his transparency to me seems like a foggy day on the beach.

Living on a beach now for some two decades, I know what it’s like looking through salt encrusted windows and it’s not until I clean those windows do I have a clear image of those red sails in the sunset cruising  in the azure waters of the Gulf of Mexico to a tomorrow filled with new adventure.

But today, now approaching the magical first 100 days of the Obama Administration, my vision of the future can’t seem to be cleared by a simple two drops of Visine in each eye.

Allow me to explain why I think many, especially politicians and hidden persuaders, want us to see things their way.  After all, why would I be writing this column?

The New York Times today in an editorial entitled “In the Spirit of Openness” was critical of former vice president, Dick Cheney who recently acknowledged the public’s right to know the full story of CIA interrogations of suspected terrorists, but when in office “never acknowledged the public’s right to know anything.”

However, the vision of the left wing liberal Times’ spin didn’t explain that Cheney didn’t ask for the results of these interrogations to be released until President Obama released memos written by the Bush Justice Department authorizing alleged “torture of detainees” as the Times described the actions.

While the release of such memos by Obama was considered by many as putting Americans at risk, Cheney was suggesting that full disclosure would show the world how much valuable intelligence was obtained by such interrogations.

You see “In the Spirit of Openness,”  I find full disclosure, which was Cheney’s point is the spirit of transparency.  Otherwise, how do we determine right from wrong when we get half-a-glass of information?

Cheney wasn’t asking for any of this information to be released because it was considered to be top secret.  But if you are going to release a portion of it to make a political point for the Obama Administration, shouldn’t the people know it all?  But you see that’s not the way the Times’ sees it.

Now, how is it that Obama wants to be seen during his first 100 days in office?

Apparently the White House has delivered some seven talking points to the media on how they would like them to report on how he’s doing, according to POLITICO.

1. They want us to believe Obama is a promise-keeper.

Well, so much for transparency. He did promise to post bills for a period of time before a vote, so we the people might comment and legislators would have time to read.  That hasn’t happened. I don’t remember him talking about a $787 billion stimulus plan, a $3.6 trillion budget or $1 trillion-plus deficits.  Nor do I recall him saying that he was going to take over financial institutions, banks, the auto industry and fire the CEO of GM.

2. Obama is a game-changer

The White House wants us to believe that his ideas fit together in a coherent strategy to force massive change in government, the financial sector and, ultimately, people’s lives.  This I do believe.  As I said in a previous column, his playbook resembles Saul Alinsky’s book “Rules for Radicals”.  Obama spent years teaching workshops on the Alinsky — a Neo-Marxist — method in Chicago in the 80′s.

3. Obama is the decider.

The Los Angeles Times quoted him warning banking executives: “Be careful how you make those statements, gentlemen.  The public isn’t buying that.  My administration is the only thing between you and the pitchforks.”

4. Obama’s not in the bubble.

The President reads 10 letters a day– all screened by a staff — from ordinary Americans which implies that he is in touch with the people.  If you believe this one you might as well believe that this was true with executives at Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and General Motors.

5. Obama is not FDR

They want us to believe, POLITCO reports, that these times are different than those of the New Deal, they say, and it will take time for Obama’s version of “bold, persistent experimentation” to take root in meaningful ways.

6. Obama is FDR.

First he says he isn’t and then he says he is — what is he saying?  While aides seem to distance Obama from FDR, they like the New Deal analogies.  All that I can say about FDR is what history has proven, the New Deal didn’t work and the only thing that brought us out of the Great Depression was World War II.

7. Obama is one cool cucumber.

Aides love the image of a calmly competent president who never loses his head or his temper.

Yes, this is the President that bowed to the Islamic King of Saudi Arabia; admitted to Europeans that Americans were part of the blame for the world’s financial crisis; told Russians he wants to reset relations which fell to Cold War-style levels under Bush; asked NATO for more help in Afghanistan, got none; lifted some restrictions on Cuban Americans, was rebuffed by Fidel Castro; shook hands and patted Hugo Chavez on the back and accepted an anti-American book he couldn’t read; and said it was America’s appetite for illegal drugs, its lax of control for the flow of guns to Mexico to partly blame for drug-lord-inspired violence in that country.

Well, I’m going to clean my windows, to see if I can get a clearer vision of the next 100 days and search for a glass that is half full of gin.