jenmito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:12 AM
Original message |
It looks like the Obama admin. beat the media! |
|
The media has been doing its best to try to get Obama to back off a public option. First, they showed every town hall meeting that had "constituents" (yeah, right) shouting about how angry they were about the government "taking over health-care."
Then after that, they thought they managed to get the public option replaced with "co-ops" and they started discussing how THEY would work in place of a public option that "obviously" had no support (yeah, right). Then for the past week or so, they started talking about how the public option is somehow back, but with a "trigger" to please Olymia Snowe and "maybe some other moderate Republicans (yeah, right).
But today, on the Sunday shows, the admin. officials were out talking about how Obama will make a case for a public option Wed. night. All the interviewers could do was "point out" to them that there's no SUPPORT for a public option (yeah, right), asking how it will be possible to get this passed in Congress. Obama's people held strong and said Obama will explain why a public option is important to keep costs low and insurance companies honest.
Now the media is forced to talk about the public option again-no co-ops, no triggers. Obama won ONE fight already.
|
WeDidIt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:18 AM
Response to Original message |
1. There was no coherent message |
|
Gibbs says yes to PO, Axelrod says it's negotiable.
So we had another week of no coherent message.
|
Jennicut
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. You also compared Obama to Hoover. |
WeDidIt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. He's most definitely the WEAKEST president since Hoover |
|
Edited on Sun Sep-06-09 11:23 AM by WeDidIt
And I stand by that statement.
|
Jennicut
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
jefferson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
Well okay then. That sure speaks volumes about your credibility on things Obama.
|
phleshdef
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #9 |
13. And his/her credibility of historical knowledge in general. |
phleshdef
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
11. The longer you stand by a statement like that, the more your credibility is damaged. |
tridim
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
14. Thanks for the Sunday morning laugh. |
|
Edited on Sun Sep-06-09 11:32 AM by tridim
:rofl:
Unfortunately I can't really pin this one the media because you already claimed that daily media spin is an illusion and just a RW talking point.
|
rufus dog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
18. CAPS CAPS CAPS CAPS CAPS CAPS |
|
Not sure how to even respond, but it should be in caps and 72 point font.
You are saying Obama is the weakest President since Hoover?
|
SemiCharmedQuark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
Gman2
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
23. While I understand your point, it is naive. |
|
Obama, had he come out swingin' would be an angry black man. Had Hillary won, and come out swingin', she would have been a bitch. We are running candidates with vestigial stigma's. Expecting Obama to make all the moves, the people have doen squat.
|
FatDave
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #23 |
55. Or maybe they shouldn't waste time worrying about how they'll be percieved... |
|
...and just fucking do what's right? Seriously, seems like democrats can come up with a million excuses for why they had to fuck up delivering on their promise.
|
skipos
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
30. You must have had different history classes then I did |
|
I read that Hoover stuck to his guns and claimed that government shouldn't do anything about the economic crisis. That was dumb, but he certainly wasn't weak.
How was Hoover weak? He did exactly what he wanted to do.
|
SemiCharmedQuark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #30 |
|
He was wrong.
Big difference.
|
WeDidIt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #30 |
33. He and his entire party got their asses handed to them in '32. |
|
That's pretty fucking weak.
|
SemiCharmedQuark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #33 |
34. So did the Republicans in 2006 and 2008 |
|
Why do you not consider Bush a weak president?
|
WeDidIt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #34 |
35. He still got his tax cuts |
|
when his party was the minority in the Senate.
|
SemiCharmedQuark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #35 |
37. But Hoover didn't have problems in Congress |
|
He didn't WANT them to act.
|
WeDidIt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #37 |
38. Which is pretty fucking weak. n/t |
SemiCharmedQuark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #38 |
40. So getting Congress to do what you want is weak? |
WeDidIt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #40 |
45. No, combining a do nothing congress with a do nothing adminsitration |
|
Edited on Sun Sep-06-09 12:40 PM by WeDidIt
is weak.
Adn we're about to see it happen again.
|
SemiCharmedQuark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #45 |
49. He WASN'T a do nothing president though |
|
That wasn't the problem. His problem was that he believed strongly in volunteerism over legislation.
He did plenty, including having Mexicans and Mexican Americans forcibly removed and sent back to Mexico.
|
SemiCharmedQuark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #45 |
51. Please give me your definition of "weak" |
|
Not an example. An actual dictionary definition, please.
|
SemiCharmedQuark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #34 |
|
I see two possibilities.
Case 1: you are using the term "weak" to mean "ineffectual" or implying that said president couldn't get his legislation passed. In this case you are incorrect because that wasn't Hoover's problem.
Case 2: you are using the term "weak" to mean "bad". If that is the case, you REALLY think Obama is worse than Reagan and the Bush boys?
|
dionysus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
too early in the day to start huffing glue my man...
|
Phx_Dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
44. You get the award for the lamest and least true statement yet. |
|
If he's so weak, how is it that he's accomplished more in 8 months than any of his predecessors.
|
Aramchek
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
your username smacks of irony since you obviously have done nothing.
|
jenmito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #50 |
msallied
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
54. Wow, 8 months into a 4 year term for you to say that? You really are hilarious. |
|
Seriously. I'm :rofl: over here.
|
Cha
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
41. You didn't understand..all you do is look for |
|
negative shit and twist it around to meet your own little agenda.
Anyone who sucks up the corporatemediawhore Shit deserves the Burn.
|
jenmito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
52. I just saw Axelrod on MTP and he said no such thing. |
|
Can you show me a quote/transcript of him saying a PO is negotiable?
|
HopeOverFear
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:21 AM
Response to Original message |
2. They may have beat the media but they didn't beat Glen Bleck |
|
they caved in faster to that son of a bitch than I don't know what. I'm really dissapointed in Obama right now.
|
polichick
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
6. It is disturbing - the other side never caves, but our guys... |
|
...cave at the drop of a hat.
|
WHAT
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
57. "our guys" walk away...and |
|
they need to keep doing that.
I would think President Obama has back-up for all of his appointed staff because it's not worth wasting time on the faux hysteria that is being manufactured by the propaganda arm of corporate media. It's like town-hall bologna, everyone is sick of it.
Push the agenda and when cm focuses on and piles on the designated outrage du jour leave them behind with new players already in position to move policy forward. People watching the reruns (Obama/dems this, that, or the other...blah, blah) aren't paying attention.
oh, look, what's that? it's another media kerfluffle
|
freddie mertz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
21. They CAVED to Glen Beck, just as they appear to be caving now... |
|
Seems that Faux, Beck, Nelson, Conrad, B. Lincoln, and the other swine have figured out that there is no threat coming from this gang of amateurs.
What a sad state of affairs.
|
jenmito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
25. Well, that's true, but if Van Jones had stayed, he probably would've been |
|
a distraction-another person for the RW to get all "Reverend Wright" on.
|
Cha
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
46. Are you going to contact them about it? |
Connie_Corleone
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:26 AM
Response to Original message |
5. The AP is still fighting back. |
|
They really did a spin job on what was said this morning and made it seem like the admin. officials were willing to give up the public option by using it as a bargaining chip.
|
ProSense
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:28 AM
Response to Original message |
butterfly77
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:30 AM
Response to Original message |
10. That is what has been the media's strategy all along because.. |
|
we all know that they are part of the republiCON party. The media's talking heads who report what is going on day to day always throw out the rightwing talking points then tell us the public option is dead.
Some of the easily led believe their story line, as though there are none on the other side who believe in a public option. The media always shows the side that is against the public option in their reports,then say it over and over again and then all of the media outlets runaway with it as though the bill has been written as their lies were the truth.
|
freddie mertz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:30 AM
Response to Original message |
12. I was not encouraged by the Gibbs and Axelrod appearances.. |
|
They seemed TO ME to make it clear that what is left of the public option is more than open to negotiation and outright elimination.
Maybe you saw different shows this morning?
|
ProSense
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #12 |
15. Here, Axelrod has a message for you and |
freddie mertz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #15 |
20. His words are weasel words. No insistence, no strength behind them. |
|
As I have put it elsewhere:
"Would be" is a future conditional construction, which leaves open the possibility of accepting a no-public-option plan.
(A stronger statement would be something IS.{/b}
"Valuable" as a modifier of 'tool" is equally WEAK, it does not by any means translate into "essential. "fundamental," or "critical."
Anyone with a remotely objective ear can tell that this was a weak endorsement, at best.
|
ProSense
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #20 |
24. Your comment is incoherent drivel. |
|
Edited on Sun Sep-06-09 11:47 AM by ProSense
Axelrod: "In no way did I back off our position"
|
freddie mertz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #24 |
58. "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain..." nt. |
alcibiades_mystery
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #12 |
26. But YOu wouldn't be encouraged if the baby Jesus came down and sat on Obama's shoulder |
jenmito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #12 |
28. Katrina Vanden Heuvel was. She said, after hearing Gibbs, she thinks Obama will |
|
make clear that we need a public option.
|
ProSense
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #28 |
29. It's clear from some of the reactions to this episode |
|
Edited on Sun Sep-06-09 12:03 PM by ProSense
that there are people on the left (if they really are) ready to distort Obama's message regardless of what he says.
|
jenmito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #29 |
32. Ain't THAT the truth? |
|
Some of them will NEVER be happy with Obama and will do or say anything to make him look bad.
|
Peacetrain
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #29 |
43. I have come to the conclusion that we spent too much time out of power |
|
That for "some" of us..the only way they function is in the negative.
|
Windy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
48. You obviously wouldn't be encouraged by anything that was said. |
|
Your mind is made up and is against Obama.
|
freddie mertz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #48 |
59. Nonsense. I like Obama and want him to succeed. |
|
He is frustrating the crap out of me though.
|
democracy1st
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:38 AM
Response to Original message |
16. this admin isn't ahead of sh.. |
jenmito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #16 |
27. Thanks for your intelligent input. |
flamingdem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:38 AM
Response to Original message |
17. Stop trashing Obama, start trashing CNN nt |
flamingdem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #17 |
19. AND ESPECIALLY AP ... lying sacks of shit nt |
Peacetrain
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:37 PM
Response to Original message |
42. I love it when the media has to eat crow... without salt.. |
jenmito
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #42 |
|
especially when I'M about to eat brisket with salt AND pepper! :D
|
mucifer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-06-09 03:29 PM
Response to Original message |
56. the media won't talk about the details. They have and will focus on Obama's poll #s and Van Jones |
|
They never HAVE to focus on what is important and I believe they never will. It's not in their corporate interest to be realistic.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed Apr 24th 2024, 06:08 PM
Response to Original message |