Rahmbling Man channels Palin and can't answer Yes/No questions (sigh)

[thesquanderer]

A disappointing clip, IMO.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpDy2KqPhvQ

The first question/answer, about linking the stimulus plan and the Colombian Free Trade agreement, is okay... Rahm goes off in various directions, but at least ultimately answers the question, that the two issues should not be linked.

The second question, whether January's broader economic plan should include permanent tax cuts, is ignored. But while not answering the specific question, Rahm's response is still generally on topic, as he talks about what the goals of the plan should be. Though he could have added, if not a direct yes/no answer, at least a direct non-answer, like "that hasn't been determined yet" or the old standby "we're considering many options..."

But it gets worse. George Stephanopolous then asks whether, in light of the current economic crisis, they might consider postponing the tax increase on people making over $250k.

Rahm rambles through a long answer, largely repeating what he already said. If you listen really closely, you can hear that he is essentially answering "no" but it is so buried that you can't be sure, and certainly Stephanopolous doesn't hear it, as he asks the question a second time, gets a similar response, and basically ends the segment by saying he's giving up and won't ask a third time.

Rahm, like a typical politician, can't directly answer questions. I guess it's good that Obama didn't make him Press Secretary.

(In case you don't get the answer either, the implied answer "no, the tax increase on wealthy Americans should not be delayed" is held inside the comments that Obama's plan was not built on the "data at this particular moment" but rather aimed at correcting long term problems that have squeezed the middle class. I know, it's quite a hunt.)

Meanwhile, I have to add, Rahm's answer to the second time Stephanopoulous asks the question sounds positively Palinesque

"The core economic part of his strategy is the middle class. That is the basis of it, George. And it is a stra... And the economic plan was built on that. And whether... when it's dealing with, (A) the first year of the tax cut, but also the immediate things of dealing with the reforms that are related to both education, health care, energy, taxes... Those immediate... Those issues that are usually referred to as long term are immediate."

Geez.

But yes, I think George Clooney will play him in the movie.

[BeyondGeography]

1. Free Republic too sad for you these days?

[VeraAgnes]

3. My exact feeling as well.

It's time to Clean House. This crap defers Donations.

Pizza time!

[thesquanderer]

8. donations

I'm a donor too...

[thesquanderer]

7. Now, now

You can tell by my other posts, I am not here under false pretenses!

[blondeatlast]

12. It's early but there's already several here today. Transparent as air, too. nt

[Trajan]

2. I dont know where we draw the line on anti-Democrat messages ...

I am guessing this is close ...

I dont know .... school me ...

[thesquanderer]

10. ?

Is no criticism allowed here?

[Trajan]

13. Less than one week into post election ...

And you decide it is time to start tearing down the Obama administration ?

I dont know ... Seems a bit gratuitous to me ....

Now: I always wondered .... Does DU give your money back ? .. Or do they keep it ?

[thesquanderer]

20. nah

I'm not tearing down the administration. I was disappointed by that interview, though. And I don't want my money back. Or my vote. :-)

[Clio the Leo]

29. It was a terrible analogy...

... with all due respect.

The names "Emanuel" and "Palin" have no business being in the same sentence. It's not your criticm, but your hyperbole.

[thesquanderer]

31. Ah!

re: "It's not your criticm, but your hyperbole."

Good point, thanks for helping me understand some of the response I've gotten! I have a (minor) journalism background, and my headline was designed to be compact and prompt someone to want to read the post, but those same elements lead to the possibility of it coming off more critical than intended.

[apnu]

45. I see a lot of tearing down of Obama here.

The loose coalition on DU has ended and now the squabbling will return.

Expect to hear whining and complaining from everybody who feels they are not getting 200% of what they want from the Obama Administration. Especially the middle to far left Democrats and allies (There's a bunch of Greens here and other independents)

Obama has always side that he's a bit left of center, that he's an old school liberal, not neo-liberal. Also he's always said he would govern from the middle. People are suddenly incensed by this, I have no idea why. Didn't they pay attention to what he was saying?

[thesquanderer]

47. OTOH...

Wouldn't it be boring here if the only posts were of people saying how wonderful they thought everything was? ;-)

[panader0]

14. Criticism yes

But equating Rahm with Palin? That's too much.

[blondeatlast]

16. Big, glaring difference the OP missed: emanuel has political capital and knowledge.

Palin's got a Neiman Marcus credit card and not much else, period.

[thesquanderer]

21. clarification

Oh I know. Believe me, I did not mean in any way to compare Emanuel's credentials to Palin's!

Sorry if that wasn't clear. The lack of direct answers bugged me, and he does seem to ramble, but the specific Palin thing I found amusing more than anything else. Don't you think that sounded a lot like a Sarah response? It doesn't bug me so much, because he's not running for Pres or VP, and his job certainly doesn't demand Obama's oratory skills. But I just laughed when I heard that sentence.

[blondeatlast]

26. So what's with the "sigh" at the end?

Even Dems like me who don't care for Emanuel's own policies in the Senate have to give him props for being an ass-kicker. He isn't supposed to be "explaining" Obama's policies--that's the job of the press secretary.

But he WIL make certain Obama's goals get reached even if he has to knock a few people around to do it.

[thesquanderer]

28. Good question

You're right, I shouldn't be ascribing him the job of the press secretary. And maybe some of George's questions weren't best addressed to chief of staff, he just happened to be the one around to ask.

That said, if you're going on national TV as an Obama representative, it would be refreshing to hear something that wasn't so typical political-speak (or non-speak, as the case may be). Hence the sigh.

[thesquanderer]

24. didn't mean...

...to equate Rahm and Palin. (Please see "clarification" post #21)

[blondeatlast]

33. Within one hour you can edit your post.

You've made a couple of mistakes that raised the DU radar. So did I way back when.

I won't school you on what they are--if you are in it for the long haul you'll learn. You discovered one already, maybe both.

Edit (see?) Make that three; actually four. But you will learn if you belong here. Psst: donating means little since U gives a star to the teeniest of donations (as they should, IMHO).

[QueenOfCalifornia]

4. Didn't you get the memo?

You are supposed to be at WalMart stocking up on guns, ammo and American cheese. None of that Socialist European cheese... Okay?

Oh, and... As WH chief of staff Emanuel will not be making policy decisions.

[thesquanderer]

11. true

re: WH chief of staff Emanuel will not be making policy decisions.

and a response that includes "that's not my call" among the rest of the answer is fine too. It is the failure to directly address or even truly acknowledge a question, and instead just go off on "talking points", that is so politics-as-usual and therefore a little disappointing to hear. Oh well.

[thesquanderer]

27. American cheese??

I don't get it... I do like american cheese... is there something wrong with that? But nope, no guns for me!

[Unsane]

5. It would be irresponsible for Rahm to go off half-cocked, giving yes-no answers on behalf of Obama

Truth be told, Rahm may not even KNOW what Obama's positions are on some of these things. He handled himself well.

[thesquanderer]

30. I agree

I'm not looking for half-cocked answers, or for someone to say he knows Obama's position when he may not. And it's fine to answer a yes-no with something that equivocates, it's just bothersome to me to have the question ignored. Or answered, but in such a way that you can't even tell it was answered.

[wyldwolf]

6. so what, exactly, do you disagree with?

[thesquanderer]

17. the delivery, not the positions

re "so what, exactly, do you disagree with?"

Philosophically, I don't disagree with anything he said. The positions are all fine with me.

I am disappointed in what he didn't say, i.e. that he sounds like a typical politician who just says what he wants to say (fine) but won't actually answer "yes" or "no" to a question... maybe it's out of fear of offending someone, maybe it's just out of habit, but why can't politicians say the words Yes or No, and *then* go on and explain themselves? Or maybe do a little explanation preamble before ultimately saying Yes or No? It's sadly rare.

His answer was essentially, I think, "No, we don't think postponing that part of our tax plan will be necessary, because the plan as a whole is based on providing a true, long-term correction to the previous economic plans that have unfairly squeezed the middle class."

The answer is fine, and some additional elaboration is fine, but the answer was so buried that it sounded like he hadn't answered the question at all. It actually kind of sounded like he was running out the clock, repeating and going on about things without directly answering the question, to the point where there was no time to get to another question!

[wyldwolf]

18. then you have a problem with every elected politician...

.. who all give answers like that.

[thesquanderer]

22. true

Yes, it is indeed typical politician-speak. I guess that's why I was disappointed. But I guess there aren't that many Obamas to go around.

[wyldwolf]

25. Obama included... sorry

[thesquanderer]

34. true again

re "Obama included... sorry"

You're right, he isn't always as direct as I'd like, but he does tend to be more direct than what I was talking about in that clip.

The only ones who are really direct usually don't get too far. Like Dennis Kucinich. John Edwards was pretty direct this time, too, at least for someone who actually had a chance.

[Essene]

46. In other words, you admit you're making a big deal over nothing

Simply because you think people who can't follow this discussion might think he's not answering the question.

[RollWithIt]

9. Rahm responds to you....

"Fuck off asshole."

[blondeatlast]

15. Because Obama isn't a yes/no kind of guy. THANK WHATEVER DIVINE SPIRIT YOU

MAY BELIEVE IN!

[thesquanderer]

19. Obama is more direct

Obama tends to be more direct in his responses, which I like.

I'm not arguing for simplistic yes/no answers to complicated questions. But I do like when the questions are actually clearly addressed, and a yes, no, or maybe is included when reasonable.

[City Lights]

23. You're delusional if you think that Rahm channeled Palin.

:eyes:

A disappointing post, IMO.

[thesquanderer]

37. awww

You didn't think that sentence was funny in its Palinesque quality? Oh well. Anyone??

[LanternWaste]

32. I understood his answers quite clearly.

I understood his answers quite clearly.

But then again, I'm the first to admit that I was listening, and really don't have any preconceived notions of the guy...

[thesquanderer]

35. What about George?

re: "I understood his answers quite clearly. But then again, I'm the first to admit that I was listening, and really don't have any preconceived notions of the guy..."

So when George Stephanopolous re-asked the question and then gave up on asking it yet again, was he not listening? Or was he swayed by preconceived notions?

(Personally, I simply think he could have answered the questions more clearly, that's all.)

[blondeatlast]

38. As to your last point, that is hardly how you framed it.

As to Steph--he's a tool--and he has preconceived FALSE notions--of his own relevance.

[LanternWaste]

39. contemplate conjecture and make presumptions...

"So when George Stephanopolous re-asked the question..."

I can't speak for George's ability to infer an answer, only for myself-- the best I'd be able to do is contemplate conjecture and make presumptions.

Maybe you could direct that particular question towards the salient respondent (i.e, George)... :shrug:

[Essene]

44. You're not being sincere. George repeated it to get more details (which he isnt going to get)

Emanuel was staying vague for GOOD REASON.

Obama is leaving open room for shifting and negotiations in 2 months, which is smart. He has invited in a massive number of advisers to flesh out details, so they need to back down from getting specific and to be sure they get it RIGHT come January/February.

You have a problem with that?

Folks on DU see somebody new, with a low post count... comparing this to Palin... and that's because the truth is... you are no sincere.

You are seeing what you want to see. Move along.

[Every Man A King]

36. Dodging questions isn't the same

as being a total moron.... but you knew that already, right?

[truthisfreedom]

40. You're not going to bring us down.

We're all happy in here. 8^) Obama WON! YAY!

[Marrah_G]

41. Shoo Fly

The election is over.

Are you not insanely happy that Obama won and those horrible Repukes are finally being kicked out?

[Occam Bandage]

42. Dodging questions is a political skill. That isn't "channeling Palin" any more than

you are "channeling a DUer."

[Essene]

43. You are disappointed because you're looking to be disappointed...

Obama isn't President yet. Rahm is merely Chief of Staff.

The only mistake in my mind is having Rahm as the future admin's face.

Obama has hinted that the economic plan is OPEN TO TWEAKING, and he's going to wait until January before solidifying it. Dodging on the specifics of a final tax plan and on spending cuts... is to be expected.

[surrealAmerican]

48. This isn't a case of "can't answer" the questions ...

... it's more a case of "won't answer" the questions. It seems a bit too early to be even asking him some of these questions.

[thesquanderer]

49. It's Not Just Me!

Finally... after a day of being beaten up here ;-) -- I found another (presumed) Democrat who had an overall reaction similar to mine (although differing in some detail). A Buzzflash editorial, for those who might be curious:

http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/carpenter/235

[WinkyDink]

50. Did I miss the election where we got President Emanuel??

[AZSlacker]

51. Yeah, he'll make a crappy press secretary..... oh wait....

[thesquanderer]

52. Rahmbonics

It turns out that Rahm is well-known for mangling the English language... as this article explains...

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15510.html

Maybe a small amount of vindication! ;-)