Maaan. Look at his face when he's carefully and logically addressing and refuting many of the erroneous or misleading republican points. Look at the corners of his lips turn down and he looks down at his desk and he furrows his brow - and then says something nice. You can tell he's feeling alot of emotion. I'd say it was contempt, or rage.
Which I feel when I listen to their talking points. I wonder if Obama is actually as cool and collected as he seems. His voice and his words are always nice, but his face in this exchange is hilarious. He's clearly holding back alot of emotions.
If you read Dreams From My Father the answer is no. Dude is very, very self-controlled. The clearest indication of that is the "The truth is Brian, we're not going to solve global warming if I change the fucking light bulbs in my house, it's something collective" quote.
I checked out that book in December, but couldn't find the time to read it. I'll have to check it out again.
Or rather, was it worth it? Oh who cares, i'm gonna watch it anyways while I digest my dinner and ride my excercise bike.
Oh god yes is it worth it.
This is ALL red meat, even if you skip the amazing cocaine that is Olbermann and Maddow working together to grind the republican talking points into a delicious all-purpose powder, this is still Obama dodging and weaving on the fly better than any boxer I've ever seen.
If you can get any of the players to work just watch the raw footage. It was that with Chris Matthews being inane and Olbermann/Maddow being smug. And commercials.
The best part about actually watching the video compared to the the text is the obvious "Good Lord, you guys are stupid" body language/facial expression/tone of voice.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
lonelyahavaCall me Ahava ~~She/Her~~Move to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
edited January 2010
ohgod.
Mike Pence needed notes to ask him his question? And yeah, that's a fantastic smile on Obama's face. I really do love this man. This is the president that I voted for.
And if you don't like that Rust, you can go be a silly goose elsewhere.
Or rather, was it worth it? Oh who cares, i'm gonna watch it anyways while I digest my dinner and ride my excercise bike.
Oh god yes is it worth it.
This is ALL red meat, even if you skip the amazing cocaine that is Olbermann and Maddow working together to grind the republican talking points into a delicious all-purpose powder, this is still Obama dodging and weaving on the fly better than any boxer I've ever seen.
God, I could watch this all day.
This isn't dodging and weaving. He's meeting them head on. If you want a boxing analogy, it's like Rocky taking on Mr T the second time in Rocky III where he just begs Mr T to hit him... and just stands there like nothing is happening.
Unreal. Everyone should demand more of this. If we could see this sort of thing every month, think of the selective pressure on our elected representatives. Oh my god, we'd have a government comprised of individuals capable of reasoned debate.
The WH should demand that the GOP do this again and hit it hard when they say no.
I'm watching it on my DVR, personally and its amazing.
Also to the guy above criticizing my boxing analogy:
Yeah, thats what I get for using a subject I know jack shit about for my analogy. Still I'd say not all of this is head on, Obama is doing his share of subject changing, even if its to shoot a jab or two of his own.
I'm watching it on my DVR, personally and its amazing.
Also to the guy above criticizing my boxing analogy:
Yeah, thats what I get for using a subject I know jack shit about for my analogy. Still I'd say not all of this is head on, Obama is doing his share of subject changing, even if its to shoot a jab or two of his own.
I'm just saying, it feels like he's starting to fight back and that's... ya know.. what we voted for. Obama recognized change wasn't going to be easy. But now I think he's recognizing change doesn't happen if you're always a nice guy and trying not to step on toes.
YodaTuna on
0
Options
lonelyahavaCall me Ahava ~~She/Her~~Move to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
edited January 2010
Questions to the President is fine.
But like somebody said earlier, The President isn't a PM. The PM is technically a member of parliament, so it happens on parliament floor.
but the president going to the Hill and standing on the floor of congress with the congresscritters all around him. That's not good stagecraft. It would lessen the president a bit.
Now, if they were to do it in an outside venue, like this was, away from DC? And do it every other month or so, then yeah, I can see it working.
But monthly, and in congress? No. It makes the President look like less than he is, like he has to go to congress to get anything done, not them coming to him. It's not a good visual.
You find a way to stage it to make it still obvious that the President is the President, I'll be all for it.
But monthly, and in congress? No. It makes the President look like less than he is, like he has to go to congress to get anything done, not them coming to him.
I myself hate how the (lack of) separation of powers combined with party politics is turning the president into some sort of God-king. I'm all for opportunities for Congress to symbolically demonstrate itself as an autonomous branch of government--one which ostensibly has much more power than President.
If what Paul Ryan said about discretionary spending and not mandatory spending increasing by 84% is true (if), then I think Obama pulled kind of a dick move on that question (Chris Matthews pointed this out too).
But monthly, and in congress? No. It makes the President look like less than he is, like he has to go to congress to get anything done, not them coming to him.
I myself hate how the (lack of) separation of powers combined with party politics is turning the president into some sort of God-king. I'm all for opportunities for Congress to symbolically demonstrate itself as an autonomous branch of government--one which ostensibly has much more power than President.
The legislative branch is, constitutionally, the most powerful of the branches. But, the President is still seen and called and for all purposes is the leader of the country. That awards him a bit of deference.
Again, I'm fine with these question type things happening, but the staging has to be handled just right. The Show must go on.
If what Paul Ryan said about discretionary spending and not mandatory spending increasing by 84% is true (if), then I think Obama pulled kind of a dick move on that question (Chris Matthews pointed this out too).
Overall though, bang-up job IMO
It might be, but it's disingenuous as that's a) outlays for the health reform bill that will eventually result in saved money and b) the stimulus bill. At least I think.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
0
Options
MrMisterJesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered Userregular
i like the part 42 minutes in where the pub says "hey we keep giving you ideas and you keep ignoring us" and Obama's response is basically "a plan that magically fixes anything without spending any money doesn't count as a plan".
Pi-r8 on
0
Options
lonelyahavaCall me Ahava ~~She/Her~~Move to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
edited January 2010
oohhh marsha Blackburn... The president looks like he's trying to not fly out there and smack her. He's really struggling with that.
i like the part 42 minutes in where the pub says "hey we keep giving you ideas and you keep ignoring us" and Obama's response is basically "a plan that magically fixes anything without spending any money doesn't count as a plan".
I don't know if this has been cited, but it really summarizes my thoughts on the debate today, and why I like Obama such in general.
Giving a good speech nowadays is considered ``speechifying,'' gussying up the obvious. At worst, it's viewed as sophistry, peddling cow pies as creme brulee. Even the word rhetoric, long a pillar of classical education, has devolved to mean empty speech.
So when a truly gifted orator like Barack Obama appears, his talent can count as much against as for him. Critics say, Oh, sure, he can give a good speech, as if that's a bad thing. To admire his skill is tantamount to confessing puppy love, or gullibility.
I think he ranks with the best speakers in my lifetime, and by far the best of the modern presidents. What President Obama has done, and is doing, is rehabilitating rhetoric itself. When he gives a major address, such as Wednesday's State of the Union, you hear a leader actually thinking through a difficult issue in public, taking a skeptical, even critical audience down a careful line of reasoning toward a new way of thinking. It is, traditionally, one of the central roles of statesmanship.
Qingu on
0
Options
lonelyahavaCall me Ahava ~~She/Her~~Move to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
edited January 2010
The office itself deserves a bit more respect and deference. Not the man, the Office.
If you're not going to afford the office of the Presidency some added respect, some extra deference and benefits, even if is just all stage show, then we might as well switch to having a Prime Minister.
The Presidency is the face of our nation, the Office is the most powerful position in the country as far as recognition nationally and internationally.
It's not a monarchy, ok, maybe a little bit it is, but that's fine.
It kinda should be.
And I'm talking in circles cause I lost my train of thought..... When I find it again, I'll come back again.
The office itself deserves a bit more respect and deference. Not the man, the Office.
The only respect the office should have is the power that comes with it.
The Presidency is the face of our nation, the Office is the most powerful position in the country as far as recognition nationally and internationally.
So are the vast majority of prime minister positions. Nobody gives a shit about most monarchs and the vast majority of parliamentary democracies don't have them.
But, the President is still seen and called and for all purposes is the leader of the country. That awards him a bit of deference.
Fuck deference. It has no place when it comes to elected officials.
How about simple decorum.
As enforced by the standards of this community. Or arguments at dinner tables. Or a courtroom. I mean typically, if two people are going to have a discussion, there are accepted rules of decorum.
The way many Republicans interact with debate is the way ignorant trolls interact with debate on message boards. It is not something many people do in face-to-face dialogue. And in many cases it's actually regulated by someone.
I don't know if this is actually in response to anything you said, Cous.
The trolls thing makes me think of today's meeting as 8 Obs questioning the President with one less vulgarly analogizing Jeffe responding, instead of our forum's usual discourse where that's flipped.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
As enforced by the standards of this community. Or arguments at dinner tables. Or a courtroom. I mean typically, if two people are going to have a discussion, there are accepted rules of decorum.
The way many Republicans interact with debate is the way ignorant trolls interact with debate on message boards. It is not something many people do in face-to-face dialogue. And in many cases it's actually regulated by someone.
That is more of a problem of their arguments being nonexistant or simply retarded than any lack of deference or decorum. The problem with ignorant trolls is that they never even actually have any points.
Couscous on
0
Options
lonelyahavaCall me Ahava ~~She/Her~~Move to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
The office itself deserves a bit more respect and deference. Not the man, the Office.
The only respect the office should have is the power that comes with it.
The Presidency is the face of our nation, the Office is the most powerful position in the country as far as recognition nationally and internationally.
So are the vast majority of prime minister positions. Nobody gives a shit about most monarchs and the vast majority of parliamentary democracies don't have them.
And you don't think that the power that comes with the office of the Presidency deserves a bit more respect than a congressman?
The congressman/senator was elected by a small portion of the population, the President was elected by a majority of the nation's population.
Now, I don't know a whole lot about parliamentary governments like Britain or Canada, but isn't the PM decided by whoever wins the majority of seats in parliament, and is not really chosen by the people?
How is somebody who is chosen by the entire country not more powerful than a PM who was chosen by his fellow representatives?
And no, most people don't give a shit about monarchs.
Look, I'm not arguing for a monarchy, I'm not arguing for a coronation, I'm simply saying that Should the President do a monthly "Question the President" thing, the White House needs to keep it staged in such a way that it's obvious who is the President.
I'm merely saying that it's a good idea, but the stagecraft of it is tricky. Perception is everything. And keeping the public perception of the President being the leader of the country should be the first thing in the White House's mind.
But, the President is still seen and called and for all purposes is the leader of the country. That awards him a bit of deference.
We don't have a leader--that's the whole point.
I smell a rat in [strike]Philadelphia[/strike] Washington, tending toward monarchy
Would you agree that we have a rotating cast of leaders that shift every four or eight years?
Qingu on
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
edited January 2010
I've always viewed the President as the representative for our nation as a whole and leader of the party he belongs to (in so much that s/he can direct the party to work toward something in Congress, as well as be the most recognizable person to sponsor those going up for election in mid-terms).
Posts
I can get behind this
I checked out that book in December, but couldn't find the time to read it. I'll have to check it out again.
I know, I can't wait to watch it.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Apparently with Matthews' stream of consciousness racism/orgasm too! At least according to Olbermann's diary at Kos.
Oh god me too, its like a delicious soup of hatred. I want to sip from it all day.
pleasepaypreacher.net
got stuck eating dinner with the parents.
I'm hoping they'll redo it at 10. Please?
Or rather, was it worth it? Oh who cares, i'm gonna watch it anyways while I digest my dinner and ride my excercise bike.
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
Oh god yes is it worth it.
This is ALL red meat, even if you skip the amazing cocaine that is Olbermann and Maddow working together to grind the republican talking points into a delicious all-purpose powder, this is still Obama dodging and weaving on the fly better than any boxer I've ever seen.
God, I could watch this all day.
The best part about actually watching the video compared to the the text is the obvious "Good Lord, you guys are stupid" body language/facial expression/tone of voice.
Mike Pence needed notes to ask him his question? And yeah, that's a fantastic smile on Obama's face. I really do love this man. This is the president that I voted for.
And if you don't like that Rust, you can go be a silly goose elsewhere.
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
This isn't dodging and weaving. He's meeting them head on. If you want a boxing analogy, it's like Rocky taking on Mr T the second time in Rocky III where he just begs Mr T to hit him... and just stands there like nothing is happening.
"He's getting mad!"
I mean the Maddow/Olbermann thing
like right now.
turn on msnbc. turn it on. do it!!!
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
The WH should demand that the GOP do this again and hit it hard when they say no.
I found at least clips at the Countdown site here:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/
I'm watching it on my DVR, personally and its amazing.
Also to the guy above criticizing my boxing analogy:
Yeah, thats what I get for using a subject I know jack shit about for my analogy. Still I'd say not all of this is head on, Obama is doing his share of subject changing, even if its to shoot a jab or two of his own.
I'm just saying, it feels like he's starting to fight back and that's... ya know.. what we voted for. Obama recognized change wasn't going to be easy. But now I think he's recognizing change doesn't happen if you're always a nice guy and trying not to step on toes.
But like somebody said earlier, The President isn't a PM. The PM is technically a member of parliament, so it happens on parliament floor.
but the president going to the Hill and standing on the floor of congress with the congresscritters all around him. That's not good stagecraft. It would lessen the president a bit.
Now, if they were to do it in an outside venue, like this was, away from DC? And do it every other month or so, then yeah, I can see it working.
But monthly, and in congress? No. It makes the President look like less than he is, like he has to go to congress to get anything done, not them coming to him. It's not a good visual.
You find a way to stage it to make it still obvious that the President is the President, I'll be all for it.
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
I myself hate how the (lack of) separation of powers combined with party politics is turning the president into some sort of God-king. I'm all for opportunities for Congress to symbolically demonstrate itself as an autonomous branch of government--one which ostensibly has much more power than President.
Overall though, bang-up job IMO
Good stuff.
The legislative branch is, constitutionally, the most powerful of the branches. But, the President is still seen and called and for all purposes is the leader of the country. That awards him a bit of deference.
Again, I'm fine with these question type things happening, but the staging has to be handled just right. The Show must go on.
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
It might be, but it's disingenuous as that's a) outlays for the health reform bill that will eventually result in saved money and b) the stimulus bill. At least I think.
We don't have a leader--that's the whole point.
I'll comment on the monarchy thing in a bit...
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
But the plan is so simple it just has to work!
If you're not going to afford the office of the Presidency some added respect, some extra deference and benefits, even if is just all stage show, then we might as well switch to having a Prime Minister.
The Presidency is the face of our nation, the Office is the most powerful position in the country as far as recognition nationally and internationally.
It's not a monarchy, ok, maybe a little bit it is, but that's fine.
It kinda should be.
And I'm talking in circles cause I lost my train of thought..... When I find it again, I'll come back again.
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
So are the vast majority of prime minister positions. Nobody gives a shit about most monarchs and the vast majority of parliamentary democracies don't have them.
As enforced by the standards of this community. Or arguments at dinner tables. Or a courtroom. I mean typically, if two people are going to have a discussion, there are accepted rules of decorum.
The way many Republicans interact with debate is the way ignorant trolls interact with debate on message boards. It is not something many people do in face-to-face dialogue. And in many cases it's actually regulated by someone.
I don't know if this is actually in response to anything you said, Cous.
And you don't think that the power that comes with the office of the Presidency deserves a bit more respect than a congressman?
The congressman/senator was elected by a small portion of the population, the President was elected by a majority of the nation's population.
Now, I don't know a whole lot about parliamentary governments like Britain or Canada, but isn't the PM decided by whoever wins the majority of seats in parliament, and is not really chosen by the people?
How is somebody who is chosen by the entire country not more powerful than a PM who was chosen by his fellow representatives?
And no, most people don't give a shit about monarchs.
Look, I'm not arguing for a monarchy, I'm not arguing for a coronation, I'm simply saying that Should the President do a monthly "Question the President" thing, the White House needs to keep it staged in such a way that it's obvious who is the President.
I'm merely saying that it's a good idea, but the stagecraft of it is tricky. Perception is everything. And keeping the public perception of the President being the leader of the country should be the first thing in the White House's mind.
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
Is this far-fetched?