Thought experiment: What if Obama. like FDR, held 2 press conferences EACH WEEK

[MannyGoldstein]

FDR held two press conferences each week, 1,023 in all. No topic off limits, questions not submitted in advance. They were officially off the record, but invaluable to both FDR and the press.

From his first conference:

"I am told that what I am about to do will become impossible, but I am going to try it. We are not going to have any more written questions and of course while I cannot answer seventy-five or a hundred questions because I simply haven't got the physical time, I see no reason why I should not talk to you ladies and gentlemen off the record just the way I have been doing in Albany and the way I used to do it in the Navy Department down here."

Suppose Obama did the same thing. Any thoughts on if/how things might be different?

[scheming daemons]

1. If they were off the record, then they weren't "press conferences"

...

[MannyGoldstein]

3. He wanted to not have to watch every word.

Seems reasonable. Worked out well.

[Joe the Revelator]

22. Well no shit, but that's not a press conference or something that the modern day media would take

Part in.

[ProSense]

2. "Any thoughts on if/how things might be different?" Yes,

there would be two weekly opportunities for people to parse his words and spin his message out of context.

Times have changed. This isn't the 1930s.

[MannyGoldstein]

6. So have you determined the minimum percentage of cuts that would constitute a "slash"?

We're all waiting to know our fate.

[ProSense]

12. Keep

reading WaPo. Rumor has it that they'll announce the deal any minute now based on an anonymous source.

You heard it here first!!!

[MannyGoldstein]

15. But at least we can finally agree that "cut" and "slash" mean

different things. We used to not agree on that, IIRC.

[ProSense]

18. Hmmmm?

Slash = /

:rofl:

[MannyGoldstein]

20. Ah the ROFL, signal that you're at your boundary.

Have a good evening.

[ProSense]

21. Um

leaving so soon?

/

Bye.

/

:rofl:

[CakeGrrl]

4. Oh yeah, THAT'LL work with the Corporate-owned MSM we have now.

Off the record.

MSM "leaks" what was said, but that's OK because we know they'll stay totally true to the President's wording and intent.

:rofl:



ANOTHER FDR-centric post???

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[phleshdef]

7. He would get trashed by the media for overexposing himself.

[still_one]

17. So what. No you have "unknown" spokespeople from the administration allegedly saying he is going to

slash social security and medicare, is that better?

When he was running for president, if you remember Wright said some controversial things. If Obama did not address that issue head on, he would NOT have been the nominee

Communication is NOT a bad thing, and if the President hold a press conference, no matter what the spin, he can answer it at press conference so it at worst it neutralizes the issues, and at best, he exposes the misrepresentations for all to see

[phleshdef]

23. I was just answering the question. It wouldn't bother me at all personally.

[still_one]

29. oh, ok, sorry I guess if I went on too much /nt

[jefferson_dem]

8. I'm a huge fan of FDR but this ongoing nostalgic affection is getting just a bit creepy...

in my opinion. Kind of reminds me of the right wing's love affair with Zombie Reagan.

[MannyGoldstein]

9. You're equating FDR and Reagan?

I think that learning from what worked is a great thing to do.

FDR helped working Americans. Reagan did not.

[joshcryer]

13. No, they did not say that, at all. No interpretation of what was said even comes close to that.

They are equating two different groups two two different politicians, not two politicians to one another.

[MannyGoldstein]

14. One's creepy because the object of their affection is a creep

Who harmed the country, and didn't even do the things they think he did.

No?

[joshcryer]

16. Sure, but the poster did not indicate what made the affection "creepy."

It could be as innocuous as the fact that both men are long dead.

[MannyGoldstein]

19. Nostalgia/affection/learning from long-dead people is creepy?

I hope not. That would pretty well eviscerate the study of history.

[jefferson_dem]

24. Of course not, silly.

I realize that FDR is a hero to many (though not all) here.

My comment was regarding the way some DUers constantly view everything that this president does through the comparative lens of how he stacks up to some supposed *ideal* -- FDR. I experience the same "creepiness" about the Repugs nostalgic comparisons of modern-day figures with the long-dead Reagan. Anyway, it's not a big deal. Carry on...

[Starbucks Anarchist]

28. No kidding.

It's in every single post of his.

[still_one]

10. He should have started that a long time ago /nt

[joshcryer]

11. Nothing, I mean NOTHING is off the record this day and age.

It's a nice thought but the MSM cannot be considered particularly honorable.

[Mimosa]

25. It's called 'communication'

Hellooo??? *LOL*

[bluestateguy]

26. The media woukd start ignoring them

And then establishmentarians like Mark Halperin and Gloria Borger would pen fuzzy headed columns like "Is Obama Over Exposed?"

[BklnDem75]

27. Just a reason for many to say 'they're just words' twice a week

Then complain how he needs to do 3 conferences a week.

[craigmatic]

30. They'd say he was overexposed.