• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    Ann Brown on Decisions, Decisions.
    jmac on Decisions, Decisions.
    Ga6thDem on Decisions, Decisions.
    HerstoryRepeating on Decisions, Decisions.
    William on Decisions, Decisions.
    Pat Johnson on Decisions, Decisions.
    tamens on Decisions, Decisions.
    Catscatscats on Chernobylesque
    Propertius on Chernobylesque
    Catscatscats on Chernobylesque
    William on Chernobylesque
    William on Chernobylesque
    William on Chernobylesque
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Chernobylesque
    Niles on Chernobylesque
  • Categories


  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    October 2009
    S M T W T F S
    « Sep   Nov »
     123
    45678910
    11121314151617
    18192021222324
    25262728293031
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • And They Made A Desert: 80 to 90% Drop In Nutrients In Food
      Stumbled across this lovely chart the other day. The core fact most people, including the folks in the “best every world” Panglossian movement (like Pinker) don’t seem to understand, is that even if they were right (questionable), the prosperity we have is based on burning down our house. “Sure is hot! Hottest it’s every been!” […]
  • Top Posts

  • Advertisements

Message to Obama from Left, Right, and Center: Cool It!

Wearing out his welcome?

Wearing out his welcome?

Talk about pearls before swine, true lefty Harvey Wasserman, author of Harvey Wasserman’s History of the United States, has a diary up at the Cheeto today. It hasn’t been very well received so far–only four recs, including mine; and the tip jar has two HRs (troll ratings). Like lots of other people across the political spectrum, Wasserman has something to say about President Obama’s “stunning rejection” by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) yesterday in Copenhagen. Wasserman draws a parallel between Obama’s condescending treatment of the IOC and his attitude toward the War in Afghanistan.

Ignoring fierce grassroots resistance in Chicago itself, the Obamas flew to Copenhagen with Mayor Richard Daley to “persuade” the International Olympic Committee to give the games to the Windy City.

Imagine yourself a member of the Olympic Committee as the almighty President of the United States and his entourage, with the world media in tow, swoops down from Olympus to tell you how to make your decision.

Are we surprised Chicago was summarily bounced?

Imagine yourself an Afghani villager as the almighty President of the United States shoots down from Olympus those murderous drones that kill your family and your neighbors, to be followed by heavily armed troops who—after eight years of brutal slaughter—now want to “help.”

Obama’s decision on Afghanistan will define the rest of his presidency—and the fate of our nation.

I wonder if Mr. Wasserman would like to write for The Confluence? I think we would give him a much better reception than the desperate Koolaid addicts at the Cheeto. Can you believe some of the Obama loyalists over there are accusing Wasserman of spreading Republican talking points?

From the right side of the political spectrum, Jay Cost at Real Clear Politics is also disgusted and fed up with Obama’s self-centered arrogance:

What should have been a story about Chicago – or better yet, Rio (good for you, Rio!) – is now a story about…Obama. Of course. Because just about everything in the public sphere must, must become a story about Obama. Because Obama injects himself and his campaign appartus/mindset/worldview into everything. And so, in this case, what would otherwise have been a “mere” rejection of Chicago and Mayor Daley has now become a rejection of the entire country. Why? Because of his decision to perpetuate the permanent campaign while holding the power of the executive.

I was hesitant to place a bet on the outcome of the health care debates, but I’ll place one here. Sooner or later, the American people are going to say, “Enough is enough” with this constant, incessant politicking that is inevitably built around the specialness of Barack Obama. This is not the way past presidents have behaved, and I believe for good reason: the old way is the way the people like it. If this President continues to inject himself into every little thing – such as he did with this Olympian blunder – at some point he is going to exhaust the country, thereby losing the goodwill of his fellow citizens that he still enjoys today.

Mr. Obama: please remember that you’re just the President. It’s a big deal, but it’s not that big of a deal. Chester Arthur was President. For goodness sake, Warren Harding was President, and his share of the vote was much larger than yours. Thomas Jefferson’s tombstone doesn’t even mention his eight years as President. Your current office isn’t discussed until Article TWO of the Constitution. Take the hint, and tone it down!

And from the mealy-mouthed middle, even Newsweek’s Howard Fineman, frequent guest on Obama loving MSNBC, begs President Obama to stay off the tee vee for awhile.

Despite his many words and television appearances, our elegant and eloquent president remains more an emblem of change than an agent of it. He’s a man with an endless, worthy to-do list—health care, climate change, bank reform, global capital regulation, AfPak, the Middle East, you name it—but, as yet, no boxes checked “done.” This is a problem that style will not fix. Unless Obama learns to rely less on charm, rhetoric, and good intentions and more on picking his spots and winning in political combat, he’s not going to be reelected, let alone enshrined in South Dakota.

The president’s problem isn’t that he is too visible; it’s the lack of content in what he says when he keeps showing up on the tube. Obama can seem a mite too impressed with his own aura, as if his presence on the stage is the Answer. There is, at times, a self-referential (even self-reverential) tone in his big speeches. They are heavily salted with the words “I” and “my.” (He used the former 11 times in the first few paragraphs of his address to the U.N. last week.) Obama is a historic figure, but that is the beginning, not the end, of the story.

This is an open thread.

Advertisements

96 Responses

  1. Harvey Wasserman dissed at the Cheeto? I knew those freaks weren’t liberals. What the heck is a “progressive” anyway?

    • They are not progressives–they are cultists. They refuse to acknowledge that they were wrong, so it’s attack anything/one that suggests it.

  2. There is, at times, a self-referential (even self-reverential) tone in his big speeches. They are heavily salted with the words “I” and “my.” (He used the former 11 times in the first few paragraphs of his address to the U.N. last week.)
    **********
    Obama, the corrupt, narcissistic, fraud, is turning himself into a simple buffoon.

  3. “There is, at times, a self-referential (even self-reverential) tone in his big speeches. They are heavily salted with the words “I” and “my.”

    as if this is a new development…. at times my ass, how about every speech all the time.

  4. A great President makes Americans feel good about themselves and their country — a great leader pushes us to find that something extra in ourselves to go the extra mile.

    0zero’s “leadership” style is to play the screen so that people can project THEIR wishes onto him — which means that this cretin has no clue about how to BE a leader. I have seen no examples of leadership in 0zero’s history — nor does he have masses of peers with examples of his ability to rally them to a cause. All we have are two works of fiction all about himself.

    Of course 0zero is a narcissist — and he has no clue about how to do this job.

    It doesn’t surprise me at all that less than a year later a whole lot of people are questioning this guy’s leadership — or noticing his lack of leadership ability.

    note — use the zero — 0 — on the number row of the keyboard — it saves using the shift key. 0zero, 0bama, 0bambam. ha.

  5. Good catches, bb.

    I like: “The president’s problem isn’t that he is too visible; it’s the lack of content in what he says when he keeps showing up on the tube.”

    I saw this lack of substance right away with Obama which is why Hillary was so obviously the better candidate. It has taken so loooong. Yes, better late than never. I guess Fineman et al were so busy applying meaning to Obama’s blank slate that they couldn’t discern the obvious.

    • Or they were focusing on the tingly feelings moving up their legs. Actually, I think they were probably following orders from their masters at GE.

    • The president’s problem is that he has read the same canned story off his teleprompter in all of its marketing-friendly permutations so many times already…that by the time he got to Copenhagen his story sounded like… “I didn’t have a home. I went to Chicago. I had a home.”

  6. I said last year that Obama is a fad. It looks like he’s reaching stage 3:

    1. The cool kids are doing it (growing)

    2. Everybody is doing it. (peak)

    3. The cool kids aren’t doing it (ebbing)

    4. Nobody is doing it (gone)

    5. Nostalgia (everybody laughs at themselves for having done it)

    • While they’re laughing, I’ll be crying.

    • Yes, it appears he may be reaching his “tipping point” as Gladwell defined it.

      Soon he’ll be publicly recognized as the buffoon by vast numbers of those who are willing to laugh at themselves.

  7. Take a look at this poll.

    27% say Clinton would be better president than Obama
    http://hillary.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/10/02/27_say_clinton_would_be_better_president_than_obama

    Obama continues to count on the ignorant, the Hopium addled, and the Clinton haters to get him through the next three years. I’m going to bet that the Dems who believe Clinton would’ve done the same or worse as Obama belong in the Jeralyn, Maureen Dowd, Daily Kos group who can’t admit to being snookered.

    • 27% is way too low.

      • should be 97% by now 😉

      • Yes, 27% of who?

        • I think 27% is way too low as well. I think those who disapprove of Obama would likely believe Hillary would’ve done a better job. And among those who disapprove, those who initially supported Hillary (half of the Democratic Party) would more than likely believe that Hillary was the better candidate all along.

  8. Seems a bit like Milli Vanilli…after the world wide hype and the awards, everybody caught on that they were just an act….Girl, you know it is true….

  9. Obama has always been the one he was waiting for. But, remember this koolaid from the primaries:

    The second is incrementalism: Hillary believes in getting lots of small carefully crafted policies through, one at a time, step by small step, real but almost unnoticed. Obama believes in bold moves and the building of a movement in which the bold moves are demanded by the people and celebrated when they happen. This is the reason why Hillary talks about “I,” I,” “I” (the crafter of the policy) and Obama talks about “you” and “we” (the people who demand it and who jointly carry it out).

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/george-lakoff/what-counts-as-an-issue-i_b_84177.html

    • lol

      • Pretty much all Obotian theories of His Sublime One-derfulness were hopium-induced hallucinations.

        There was no factual basis for any of it because Obma had no experience at leading and no record of accomplishment.

        • There you go again–pointing out FACTS! Obots are allergic to actual information–it’s all about the feeeeling, man.

    • ROFLMAO!!

      ah the primaries…good times.

  10. Hey, can everyone take a look at this petition here?

    http://thenewagenda.net/

    It is a counter-petition to Hollywood’s “Free Polanski” crap.

  11. “Author of ‘The People’s History of the United States'”

    That was by Howard Zinn. Wassernan wrote “History of the United States.”

    And I quibble with the description, “stunning rejection”, since Rio remained the favorite both before and after Obama’s pitch for Chicagoland.

    • You’re right. What a silly mistake. “Stunning rejection” is quoted from the post, so you’ll have to take that up with Wasserman.

    • No, Chicago was the favorite by the oddsmakers who determine ratios for betting, and since they were voted out in the first round, and people were gasping:

      Chicago–out?
      Chicago–out?

      I would say many were stunned.

      • CNN certainly was. I think most people assumed that Obama wouldn’t have gone if it wasn’t pretty close to a sure thing.

      • I saw “Chicago out on the first round” breaking live on cable news… the MSM kept using the terms “stunning” and “slack-jawed” to describe the news and the immediate reaction to it.

    • nah, Chicago was the favorite because surely no one could refuse the wonderfulness of Obama.

    • According to the Italian Press, Chicago got exactly 18 votes on the first round.

      They also say that the Brazilian President Lula had been working on influencing people for the past year.

      Rio offered the most money- $13,920 million. Tokyo got 20 votes, even though it had $5 billion ready and waiting in the bank.

      And what was Chicago offering? According to CNN Money.com

      Chicago 2016, the organization leading the effort to host the games, had projected a cost of $3.8 billion, including a “rainy day” fund of $450 million in case of unforeseen increases if the city won the bid.

      http://tinyurl.com/yh554vy

  12. Well, like many Sophomore Phenoms, he just had a good year. Can he come back? While I can, however, I’m savoring the way my “progressive” friends are avoiding any discussion that would permit me to fulfill my promise to say, “I told you.” Maybe, for the right price, Dick Morris can get in there and give him some advice.

  13. I didn’t follow this story, but there must have been some indication the IOC was inclined toward Rio. There must have been preliminary input and discussions with other Chicago or U.S. representatives.

    Did Obama think he could sweep in and change everything through prestige power? Wasn’t he setting himself up for a fall if he failed? Wouldn’t he want to preserve his aura of infallibility? I don’t get it.

    • Yes, yes, and yes.

    • I don’t think he would have gone unless they thought it was a sure thing. Obama doesn’t like to take chances on votes he can’t fix. They thought it was in tge bag and they could spin it as some amazing victory for he who tge world loves.

  14. Seems you all are suggesting selecting Chicago was a “sure thing”. Or was it Rio? Two different scenarios.

    • I don’t think Chicago was a sure thing… I think the “out on the first round,” after Obama personally showed up, was an embarrassment that took a lot of people by surprise.

    • What difference does it make? What’s your point? This post is about the reactions of three writers.

    • I don’t think Chicago was a sure thing, but I do think they were tipped off to that effect. This crew is all about image manipulation, voting present, and controlling the outcome, they don’t make a big gesture and risk looking stupid unless they have reason to believe they know tge outcome.

    • It was in no way a sure thing-they were offering less money than any of the others-Chicago $3.8billion, Tokyo $5 billion (already safely in the bank), Rio $13.9 billion and a moral right.

      • Having looked at the figures, I have a sneaky feeling that Michelle and Oprah fancied themselves a nice trip to Europe to be wined and dined by the Danish Royalty.

        They must have known, that with a shaky financial base like theirs (Daley insisting there would be no cost to taxpayers) that Chicago had no chance whatsoever.

  15. he just had a good year.
    ********
    Maybe during the campaign but his first year as President hasn’t been so good and it’s likely to get a lot worse. He is going to have to sh*t or get off of the pot with Afghanistan before Jan 20, ’10.

  16. OT: Fifty years ago on Oct 2 was the first Twilight Zone – You’re moving into a land of both shadow and substance, of things and ideas. You’ve just crossed over into… the Twilight Zone. Here’s the classic intro:

    • It’s OK. This is an open thread. They had a whole show on the Twilight Zone on Coast to Coast am–even talked to Bill Shatner.

    • Well, I feel like I am in the Twilight Zone!

  17. Interesting article in the WP about how McCrystal is acting illegally by publicly contradicting the commander in chief. Why isn’t Obama putting him in his place?

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/02/AR2009100203939.html

    • The “acting illegally” is in the mind of the writer.

      • In this country we have civilian control of the military. McChrystal would have been fired by now if Bush were still President. I hate to say that.

    • Good question. When I was a kid and my dad was active duty military — nothing negative was said about the Presidents — dem or gop. Lately I’ve been getting email from conservatives supposedly from active duty military who have some words about 0bambam. Perhaps the rules have changed — there was a lot of disrespect from military personnel re Bill Clinton. Of course he fired a few if I remember correctly. And in the end there was a lot of earned respect for Clinton.

      0zero doesn’t understand the military culture — and I’m not seeing a whole lot of CIC leadership. He really doesn’t have a clue.

      Then again with the extreme lack of experience and inability to lead and made decisions by 0bama — perhaps for the good of the military and the well being of the troops the military needs to speak out???

      bush was awful (he lied us into a war)n– but a least he had some military experience in the National Guard and he watched his dad — etc. I really hate saying anything positive about 0bama’s older brother . . . . but . . . the truth is the truth.

  18. Also OT, but very neat. Some very brief video footage of Anne Frank just prior to her and her family being forced into hiding, has surfaced on YouTube:
    Story link: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/10/03/world/main5361217.shtml

    • Amazing. Thank you for posting that.

      • I saw that years ago in an Anne Frank special…I love how even though it’s mere seconds, you still get a sense of her…that quick turn of the head. I love You Tube! Thanks!

    • Incredible. I was just at her hiding place two summers ago. It is sure ‘busier’ now, but the museum is very moving and well done. I was so happy when my 12 year old son came home and wanted to read the book.

  19. The public option is “likable enough” when it’s dead.

    Montana Governor and Obama ally Brian Schweitzer acknowledged on Friday that while he supported a public option for health insurance coverage, the proposal was likely dead in the Senate.

    Speaking at The Atlantic’s First Draft of History conference, the current chair of the Democratic Governor’s Association said that he personally favored a government-administered plan to provide insurance. “I like the public option,” he said.

    But before offering his endorsement, Schweitzer acknowledged that the provision was likely “not an option any more.”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/02/obama-ally-schweitzer-i-l_n_307998.html

  20. Christ. Unquestioning, wafer-thin analysis like this is what continues to keep me away from mainstream media.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/03/opinion/03blow.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

  21. “If this President continues to inject himself into every little thing – such as he did with this Olympian blunder – at some point he is going to exhaust the country”
    *****
    I don’t know about you, but I’m exhausted already.

  22. I was disgusted when I thought Barry went over because it was in the bag . But now it turns out I was actually giving Team Obama more credit than it deserved.

    What high power folks in Chicago are discovering this weekend is, Barry’s Bus has some mighty high axles on it …and the quite high up gets shoved under as well as us peons. Cry me a river. Now they have an idea how his freezing south side constitutes felt .

  23. And for those who wish to hail Glen Beck as some kind of populist hero, check out this video.

    • IT cries!!!

      • LOL!!

        • Yes, it seems the clip of Beck insulting Hillary with “IT cries” has vanished – never to be found in google-land again. At least I can’t find it – or I would post it every time Beck works up a fake tear.

          • I remember a portion of “it cries” from the Hillary Clinton Mad as Hell/b!tch video last year – but the audio track has been disabled! The whole video is viewable but no audio whatsoever.

            You can see Beck in front of a picture of Hillary with the caption “The Crying Game” but you have to be a lip reader to know that he said “It cries”.

            There’s a Media Matters stamp on that bit – maybe MM still has a copy of that in their archives?
            (I don’t want spammy to eat my comment so I’m not providing the URL for noted video – but it’s easy enough to find with the terms Hillary Clinton Mad as Hell – plus I’m pretty sure this blog has it in the archives)

  24. OT or maybe in the ballpark: Greta van Sustern had an amazing interview with Lawrene Eagleberger last night. He talked about Obama and Clinton and how they were world’s apart. He spoke well of Clinton and in despair of Obama. NQ has the clip up and it really is a must for any WJC admirer and especially those who find 0 not just naive but dangerous.

    I am reading the Clinton Tapes. It would make a great shared read if anyone is interested.

  25. It is interesting to me that it is in 0’s small forays that he especially shows his emptiness. I am thinking particularly of the “beer summit” and the IOC escapade. Although they are relatively small affairs they show in the boldest terms how inept this man is. (Is man the right word??? probably not.)

  26. Valerie Jarrett says Obama was told he could clinch Chicago win

    “The intelligence that we had from the U.S. Olympic Committee and Chicago bid team was that it was very close and therefore well worth our efforts,” said Valerie Jarrett, a senior White House advisor. “The message was that . . . a personal appeal from the president would make a huge difference.”

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/la-na-obama-olympics4-2009oct04,0,836075.story

    • Think it might have been a setup?

      • I’d bet it was a set-up. But by whom? The scariest possibility is that Rahm Emanuel set up Valerie Jarrett at the President’s expense.

        Actually, the scariest possibility is that the President might actually have flashed his butt all over Copenhagen, making no effort to cover said butt, without inside info that Chicago was in. But I just can’t believe that.

      • Was it Ashton Kutcher feeding the White House “intelligence”?
        Obama got PUNK’D. I wouldn’t be surprised if most of the IOC knew Chicago was going to be the first city eliminated and probably laughed behind Michelle and Barack’s backs the entire time they were there. Sad and embarrassing all around.

      • I think Michelle and Barack “got punked” in Copenhagen.

    • Lol Well, that changes everything! If they had intelligence on such an important matter, they had to take a shot! Maybe now he can fly to Paris to intervene with the design houses on the matter of next season’s hemlines. I’m hearing worrying rumbles.

    • This is why we did not want this inexperienced loser to be our president. He listens to the idiots around him that believe the spin that they create. If the Obamas listened to real people they would know that we are not that into them. WE, you know real Americans, the IOC, the people of the world.

  27. SNL opening tonight was Fred Armisen as Obama. It was not funny. It bombed with the studio audience because it was too close to the truth.

    From the skip – Hope & Change is now Jack & Squat.

  28. PBS/Frontline is doing a documentary on the Afghanistan War titled “Obama’s War.”

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/obamaswar/

    • A powerful and appropriate title for a powerful documentary. Thanks for posting this link. Obama can no longer blame this on Bush. Afghanistan is his war now.

    • Hmmm. PBS is living dangerously there. Their donor base will not like assigning responsibility to Obama.

  29. Both BO’s and MO’s speeches at the IOC were absurd in their self-centeredness. MO saying that the Olympics should be held in Chicago because her Dad would have felt good, because Chicago is her home town, and because…well…it would just make her and her family feel good. These two people are so full of themselves and so stupidly parochial !!!

    Obama man, go back home to Chicago, with Jeremiah Wright, Larry Sinclair, Jessie Jackson Jr. and Tony Redsko. They will all be happy to see you.

  30. The self -references of the Obamas is stunning. They really should listen to tapes of themselves talking. They probably wouldn’t notice but each time either speaks, they show themselves to be quite shallow. They’ve bought their own hype. I also think that Present Obama has been this way his entire life and its not flattering. I think the dynamics between Brown and Sarkozy and what occurred at the UN summitt has not finished playing out. Thats a story this Olympics thing is over shadowing.

    • Yes, I think it’s really amazing how much has been leaked about the Brown-Sarkozy-Obama argument. And why is Obama so rude to Brown? I don’t get that.

  31. The world says no to BO on Olympics. BO says no to world on Climate Change. No quid pro quo in Copenhagen maybe. Will he even go back there for the global summit. The progressives are calling it <a href="Hopenhagen after all.

  32. A newspaper in Europe says Rio was chosen as there have been never Olympics in South A and it is in the same time zone as the USA, great for selling TV rights.

    In addition, MO apparently came across as v arrogant. She dared to appear to the opening ceremony after the Danish queen in company of Oprah. I guess they are too cool for school!

  33. Agony over Olympic defeat – puts it nicely into perspective!

    ttp://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704471504574449363565841536.html

  34. As I mentioned in an earlier thread – both MO and BO believe their own hype – they forgot that other people’s money got them into the WH.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: