This Obama speech is so long-winded it might be the first attempt to filibuster an election.And:
Just cheerleading BO doesn't help him. He needs a sharper, more cogent message with some memorable lines.
१४ जून, २०१२
"President Obama’s Speech Gets A Thumbs Down From Political Press Corps."
It was supposed to be an important new speech, but the tweets from the press say otherwise, e.g.:
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
५३ टिप्पण्या:
"Home Run" according to Andrew Sullivan. Gotta wonder what he considers getting to first, second, and third base.
"Just cheerleading BO doesn't help him."
So he's implicitly admitting the press has been cheerleading for BO from the get go.
(P.S. Conservatives said a long time ago that giving BO a free pass wouldn't really be doing him a favor, in the long run. And so it proves.)
I honestly think he wants another vacation... and thus all he can do is re-hash old stuff.
And of course, to take a vacation now would look VERY bad.
It's amazing how much a change in the meme can make. If this speech was given 3 years ago, it would be the greatest ever. Wait didn't he give this speech 3 years ago? I rest my case.
Garrulous nature of the speech aside, I think most voters are perfectly terrified that he wants to do to energy. education. infrastructure. innovation. and the tax code. what he did to healthcare. Let's wait for the dust to settle on Obamacare before letting him drive that bulldozer elsewhere.
It seemed flat, nothing like his speeches in 2008.
"He needs a sharper, more cogent message with some memorable lines."
Yeah. Lines about how he saved the economy. Oh, wait ...
"It seemed flat, nothing like his speeches in 2008."
It's not him, Allie. It's you.
He's going down.
People now get it. We all saw that study last week that said the average US household has seen their net worth drop significantly from 2007 to 2010. Back to 1992 levels.
People across the board feel this. Cash is tight, gas prices are high, our homes aren't worth near what they were five years ago and no one has a clue how they will retire (except for public workers in Wisconsin with the golden pensions)
In the meantime POTUS crosses the country from George Clooney's house last week to Sarah Jessica Parker tonight. The average person knows that he doesn't "feel their pain". Nor is he solving anything for them right now. He might as well be Justin Bieber.
Mene mene tekel u-pharsin
The handwriting is on the wall?
Even the lefties panned it. Jonathan Alter said is was so long and windy that the listeners had lost the thread by the end.
Even the TOTUS can't save him. Who is writing this stuff ?
If I was already President and, even if I was just going for the job, I would not talk that long about anything, especially if I had nothing new to say.
If I was President, I'd tell people hell no! I'll speak for 15 minutes tops.
Less is more. This isn't a class room. I don't want to hear it. The test only has one question, pass or fail. I'm ready to take that exam now.
Wait, wait don't tell us that Obama's lies du jour are boring... The Press Corps are all racists or Clintonites, one or the other.
He is a whiney banality that couldn't fool any one today.
Romney just has to watch.
How did people NOT see through this charlatan four years ago?
memorable lines e.g. "the private sector is doing fine"
Hey members of the press corps were all earting the broccoli souffle that OBozo was dishing out three years ago and saying yum yum yum.
However--even people a total lack of taste can recognize a three year old broccoli souffle--when it's served up without even attempting to re-warm it. And when they get that sorry old mess they don't much care to wolf it down anymore.
The problem is that the dogs just plain don't like the dogfood anymore.
"Home Run" according to Andrew Sullivan.
More like a caught foul ball.
Glad somebody is checking what Obama says.
Our "largest trading partner" is not "Europe".
BTW this is supposedly the smartest president ever.
Petunia said...
"How did people NOT see through this charlatan four years ago?"
35% of the electorate would vote for Lenin/Stalin/Mao/George Wallace/John Wayne Gacy if he were a Democrat running against George Washington with Lincoln as his running mate; so that accounts for that group of morons.
Another ten percent would vote for anyone the Democrats nominated who might, with liberal goggles on, plausibly pass the sniff and retch test; so that drives the moron quotient up to 45%. This is Obama's baseline, no matter what happens.
The other eight percent?
Excuses and explanations range from peer-pressure to piss-poor critical thinking skills; gullibility, ignorance, and indifference.
In short, 53% of the electorate can't be trusted with the responsibility of voting.
Nothing new whatsoever.
"Education. Energy. Innovation. Infrastructure. And a tax code focused on American job creation and balanced deficit reduction” means "unions" and "tax increases."
The MSM is finally giving in to their natural tendencies to criticize. They've been repressing it for four years -- this could get ugly.
"the listeners had lost the thread by the end" It had a thread?
He's always been a boring, hackneyed, platitudinous and all-around irritating speaker. The myth of him being a great orator came from people who think orator means someone who runs their mouth, slowly.
Captain Platitude rides again. Is he saddle sore yet?
Usually the comments on Noonan's articles are a mixture of agreement and finding various faults with her views. There and here, like an interpretation that finds it's mark, the energy of agreement and in this case gathering anger is really palpable.
All mushy "vision thing" and no "how." [a] And forget about copping to actual intentions and what he's actually done, already, via bureaucratic means. [b]
In a nutshell, the former [a]--combined with his lack of experience and record coupled with his general newbieness--is why I didn't vote for him in November 2008, and both the former AND the latter {[a]+[b]} is why I won't be voting for him in 2012.
And that, as they say, is that.
As if we needed any more proof that the AIDS has rotted Andrew Sullivan's brain out.
Celebrating Father’s Day early, the president had lunch with two service members and two local barbers at Kenny’s BBQ on Capitol Hill.
He forgot one thing, though--the bill of $55.85. No word of a tip, either. This after Wednesday quote comparing Republicans to "a person who orders a steak dinner and martini" and then, “just as you’re sitting down, they leave, and accuse you of running up the tab."
Obama seems to be just like the "friends" he claims engage in that practice.
Obama need a new group of friends. And apparently, so do his friends.
Just as an aside:
Is Father's Day one of those [holi]days where it makes sense to celebrate it early (or late, for that matter)? I myself don't think so, and for the record, I put Mother's Day in the same category. They are entirely manufactured holidays, despite being so-called longstanding ones, and it seems to me that the only thing worse than designating a specific "holiday" for such things to begin with is that, later, it's OK to then shift it every which way while still trying to maintain the [to repeat, manufactured] special [holi] day.
What B.S., from start to finish.
Petunia said...
How did people NOT see through this charlatan four years ago?
----------------
The problem is that most independents and moderates saw right through him on stage - but all that did was make them see a doddering, war-thirsty, and economically clueless McCain on stage with him.
Both Parties blew it.
Should have been Hillary and Romney as the better nominees. With Hillary winning because Bush's inattention to economic and domestic matters while he was all about worshipping "The Heroes" and being the American Churchill against the "Evildoers". That guaranteed a Democrat in Office once it all crashed around Dubya's head.
The country would have been in better shape with Hillary than Obama...Romney obviously....and I'm still not convinced we would have been better off with McCain - given the guy had no economic clue and his top priority was getting us in more wars the Neocons wanted. (and more and more Heroes for helping the Noble Iraqis and Afghans and McCains "dear friends" in "new democratic Iraqi leadership" and Ahmed Karzai.
I miss Christopher Hitchens - who would have loved to comment on Obama's divisive class, race, and gender warfare "narratives". How the media whored itself out to Obama now coming to a 2nd reckoning of the man.
And perhaps most of all, Hitchens reminding us of all the great Brit and American "Orators" that turned out to be of no consequence because all they loved and thought about was the pleasure of hearing themselves talk, and talk, and talk to "thrilled rabble" thinking they were hearing the profound.
(Hitchens would have also eviscerated Newt and Santorum on the same measure).
chickelit wrote:
"Home Run" according to Andrew Sullivan. Gotta wonder what he considers getting to first, second, and third base.
Being British I doubt Sullivan knows his baseball idioms from a hole in the ground. Besides, it is well known that Sullivan drops trou on the first date, so the distinction between First Base and Home Plate is immaterial to him.
President Obama’s Speech Gets A Thumbs Down From Political Press Corps.
So what? Call me when it says "Political Press Corps Gives Itself A Thumbs Down For Everything Since The W. Years And It's Members Are All Quitting."
Then we can talk,...
Sounds like someone didn't take his Obamanex.
@cedarford: Should have been Hillary and Romney as the better nominees. With Hillary winning because...
--------
There is a story going around that Geithner wanted out in 2011 and the WH asked him to find a replacement. He named Hillary but the WH would not have it. They should have named her the cabinet minister for every department, heck, she should have been the president.
They were out of ideas almost as soon as they got into office.
Now even the media sees it, or at least the incompetence in the way the campaign is run/
Or maybe the magic has finally gone even for them.
Gonna be a long, hard summer on the Left.
The MSM will be back to waving the pom poms for Team Zero when crunch time comes, you can count on that.
Right now they're just trying to wipe the stains off their 'unbiased journalist' credentials.
Chip Ahoy wins the thread with:
Mene mene tekel u-pharsin
"Thou art weighed in the balance and art found wanting."
or
You're Toast
BO reminds me of a guy who gets to the big leagues and at first hits everything in sight. Then after two times through the league he goes 1 for 20 and comes back to earth. It's just a shame that he has to take the rest of us, especially those of us who saw through him the first time, with him.
First the press corps and then the more traditional Democratic interest groups will do to Obama what Obama did to Tom Barrett.
Just cheerleading BO doesn't help him. He needs a sharper, more cogent message with some memorable lines.
apparently the RNC has an ad out now (ht: Ace of Spades) that shows Obama used many of the same lines, word for word, on April 3 to a Press function
Tp Paraphrase: "Like the speech of an idiot; Full of sound and platitudes and signifying nothing".
I watched the speech. Then I read some of the feedback where the press corp effectively gave it the thumbs down. Then I read Sullivan knowing ahead of time he would have given it an A+. I've read him for a decade - his blog is a great read. But he is so in the tank for Obama that he can't see how discordant he is. He's not even impartial or separate on this now - writing meandering blog posts that actually advise his readership to "stay vigilant" in supporting Obama and attacking Romney. He is a bona fide campaign volunteer and yet he seems unaware that he's not all that different to Axelrod in reflexively viewing his guy favorably and. He's not lying - he's just wrong.
Glenn Greenwald and Conor Freidersdorf have done an excellent job of pointing out to Sullivan that every critique he gave of Bush on foreign policy is valid for Obama - and then some with drone use. And yet he condemns the former but not the latter - even arguing recently entirely in favor of the "we should fight them over there so they don't fight us over here" nonsense. Sullivan has argued himself out of all his traditional core beliefs to allow Obama wiggle room because....well that part is unclear. It's not the gay marriage issue as he was giving him a pass long before that political play - a craven, obvious move that - whilst I support - means he either lied before or is lying now. Or worse - is prepared to just say whatever he thinks will win him favorability.
Yet Sullivan does easily shove the obvious Bush-On-Steroids negatives to one side on some odd notion that Obama would be great if allowed to flourish. A man he claims has endured no scandals and barely put a foot wrong. And oddly espouses a belief that Romney is a dangerous candidate because he's a weird Mormon and "the most right wing candidate ever." His "The Big Lies Of Romney" schtick is absurd on it's face as it completely buys into the notion that Obama really is a transformative, post-political President - which he clearly has demonstrated is nonsense - and Romney is a Manchurian.
I get it - Sullivan cannot stand the idea that a Republican Party this celebratory of anti-intellectualism and in adoration of Limbaugh/Coulter-style crassness could regain power. I feel that entirely. But you can be like Kaus and Freidersdorf and be a cogent critic of the Presidents clear and many failings (and that of this party to waste these last 4 years in this manner) and of the Republican Party. Many of us are in this position. But it completely betrays any trust I have for Sullivan's arguments when he seems to be constantly convincing himself - and then his readers - why it's okay for him to give Obama a special pass that he will not grant to others.
Wit is the soul of brevity, don't expect brevity from that half-wit.
So Gavin,
You have been reading Sullivan for a decade now and think it is great?
Did you find endless explorations of conspiracy theories regarding Sarah Palin's quim to be sparkling examples of the essayist's art
In the case of the Birthers, at least they could point to the fact that Obama himself seemed to declare he was born in Kenya in his literary press collateral.
Chip Ahoy's words are, IIRC, from the book of Daniel, but biblical scholars will, I am sure, correct me if I am wrong.
Good Lord no. The secret-baby Bristol Palin conspiracy is insane. But The Dish does have it's plus points. And yes it clearly has it's negatives. But if you want to read something that clearly holds a magnifying glass over Obama-worship and loathing of this Republican Party - you can't really go wrong. Whether you agree with it or not - it's still interesting to read. The number of people writing on it helps - ironically getting very good when Sullivan is another one of his many jaunts and the "interns" get full reign. The Atlantic guys were much better than the current lot mind. And as a Brit in the US myself there is that fraternal aspect.
Mostly I enjoy reading how a self-confessed conservative Catholic Englishman in America spends large chunks of his blog arguing as to why conservatism, Catholicism and even the UK are doing it wrong. It's endlessly amusing to read how almost every tenet of conservatism and Catholicism are illegitimate and morally wrong - and yet still see Sullivan claim to be both.
Can it be that he is actually less qualified today than 3 years ago?
Back then it was: well maybe he'll be good. We don't know , but it could happen.
Now that question is answered, so we have what there was without that, which yes, is clearly worse than McCain who was the second worse person possible.
As a small business person which is really what this nation depends on for jobs, I can tell that Obama is killing the economy personally. It's him, his arrogance, his anti-business and wealth ideas, and his obvious cluelessness that makes us feel that taking chances, investing and hiring is just too risky until he is gone. It's mostly just him as a person with great power where he does not belong. Anybody else, even Anonymous, would be better.
And yes Cerdarford, you and Althouse did an irresponsible thing on an important question when you voted for this President.
The choice was like that of a lost driver, who believing he is going the wrong way, chooses to take a mysterious dirt road into the wilderness rather than just turning at the next major intersection.
I get it - Sullivan cannot stand the idea that a Republican Party this celebratory of anti-intellectualism and in adoration of Limbaugh/Coulter-style crassness could regain power. I feel that entirely.
Because god knows a party that would nominate Mitt Romney (Harvard JD/ MBA) is the quintessence of anti-intellectualism.
It's not like Romney ever wrote, like, two "literary" memoirs, or personally selected targets for assassination while pondering the philosophy of Augustine and Aquinas (as the NYT takes pains to inform us). Now that's "intellectual." Romney, please, he's so bourgeois-- a businessman, yuck. And of course that makes the Republicans virulently anti-intellectual. Or something.
Then you've got that other GOP himbo hick, Paul Ryan. What a dummy. I'm sure he hates, like, math.
And Limbaugh and Coulter, my goodness! Monosyllabic retards. Whereas the Democratic party is typified by cultural paragons of the caliber of, oh, Ed Schultz and Bill Maher. That's some highfalutin' discourse they got going on, too sophisticated for the likes of me.
"Because god knows a party that would nominate Mitt Romney (Harvard JD/ MBA) is the quintessence of anti-intellectualism. "
The whole theme that Republicans are anti-intellectual is popular with the left that doesn't do math. Many people in science are lefties because they don't know anything outside their narrow field, They mean well but don't know enough about how economics works to see that the left, and its Marxism, is just not scientific.
In fact, much of leftist politics is emotional, not rational. Surveys of Democrats and Republicans show they inhabit different worlds with the Democrats obsessed with social feel-good issues and ignoring such matters as spending and borrowing.
chickelit said...
"Home Run" according to Andrew Sullivan. Gotta wonder what he considers getting to first, second, and third base.
Little Miss Sullivan considers any utterance from his zebra choom cock-god (cause you know, to LMS, he's so exotic and all) to be home runs and he especially likes the grand slams (if you know what I mean). Hell, he's been kneeling in front of Urkel's unzipped pants for so long and receiving whatever he pumps out that at this point his commitment to Urkel is complete.
AllieOop said...
It seemed flat, nothing like his speeches in 2008.
Do you even remember any of his 2008 speeches that had you so bedazzled that you voted for him? Cause you know, it was his speeches that sealed the deal for you right? The ones that promised you the earth, moon, sun, and stars? Or was it the one where he would lower the oceans from global warming singlehandedly? What happened, the luster wore off? The shine has been dulled? What part of his now flat speech do you find so lacking? You mean the policies that you voted for aren't the same policies of today?
What part of dismantling American sovereignty, jeopardizing it's economy, and it's standing in the world through various Marxist/leftist means do you not accept anymore? Did he go to radical or to soft for you?
campy said...
The MSM will be back to waving the pom poms for Team Zero when crunch time comes, you can count on that.
Right now they're just trying to wipe the stains off their 'unbiased journalist' credentials.
It's going to end up looking like a North Korean choreographed state run media cheer section. You know, clapping, cheering, or weeping upon command.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा