Good interview. Obama didn't impress me on many of his answers because its hard to defend when what John is saying is true. Though I hope him attacking the filibuster will lead to him beating his senators into a pulp.
Mazzyx on
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
edited October 2010
Y'know, hearing that guy demand an apology himself... Seriously want bad things to happen to him.
My only regret is Jon didn't touch on the civil liberties issues. That's where this administration most let me down so far.
If you're talking about gay rights issues, then that's your own fault because pre-2008 Obama agreed it was a state's right issue and not a federal one.
I'm not, though that sucks. I'm talking about things like government transparency and privacy rights and getting shit like Gitmo dealt with.
EmperorSeth on
You know what? Nanowrimo's cancelled on account of the world is stupid.
Rand Paul is the guy who portrays himself as a doctor when he is an ophthalmologist that is not registered with the American Board of Ophthalmology, but instead the National board of of ophthalmology, which was founded by one R. Paul.
Rand Paul is the guy who portrays himself as a doctor when he is an ophthalmologist that is not registered with the American Board of Ophthalmology, but instead the National board of of ophthalmology, which was founded by one R. Paul.
Yep! Because the ABO is daggum gubment!
But, see, it works, because you can trust Rand Paul is a good Ophthalmologist, because he's registered with the National Board of Ophthalmology. And you can trust the National Board of Ophthalmology, because it was founded by a registered Ophthalmologist!
My only regret is Jon didn't touch on the civil liberties issues. That's where this administration most let me down so far.
If you're talking about gay rights issues, then that's your own fault because pre-2008 Obama agreed it was a state's right issue and not a federal one.
I'm not, though that sucks. I'm talking about things like government transparency and privacy rights and getting shit like Gitmo dealt with.
Wasn't the Gitmo thing more of a case of every single politician in america suddenly realizing that former afghani taxi drivers were criminal masterminds on par with the batman rogue's gallery and thus american prisons were not enough to hold them?
I have to say I was severely disappointed with this interview. The Daily Show has done several segments containing serious policy critiques of the financial rescue, health care reform, and civil rights issues. So we know they have a wealth of knowledge to draw on, and yet Jon asked only a very half-hearted "Ya think you might have bit off more than you can chew?" several different ways to the President. Worse as several people here have noticed Barack Obama was visibly agitated by even this the most mild form of true criticism.
Barack's defense of Summers was especially troubling as what he said was when translated from economic speak was essentially "I came into a apocalyptic mess and all the smartest people I know suggested Mr. Summers ideas based on Saltwater economic ideology shouldn't be challenged while the roof is falling in." Which means he either agree's with saltwater/supply side assumptions or he was too in awe of the magnitude of the problem to question the philosophy that constructed the crisis.
President Obama's attempts to mask a genuine difference of opinion with the claim that it wasn't practical belies multiple occasions where he didn't even try which Jon had pointed out at the time, but in the interview just let slide. I get the Jon likes Barack and is definitely allowed to be nervous to nail the President especially in a way that could depress democratic turnout or make his attempt to foster "reasonablness" look kinda of hypocritical. That said we need journalists to hold officials accountable, and the Daily Show team has the chops to do that so I am disappointed that this is what we got instead.
I don't think he was agitated by the fact that it was criticism, but more finally saying something back to all the non stop "you all have accomplished NOTHING!!!!" that comes from the dem base. Essentially, he got annoyed and put the brakes on to say bullshit, here's what we did, and that's no small feat.
And I agree. I would have LIKED a lot more, but it would be completely unfair for me to call what they have accomplished so far minor. I'm positive it's been a long standing annoyance with the White House that the dem base pretty much completely ignores progress as it's expected, and instead just constantly harps on what didn't pass.
Yeah, he was only agitated at the suggestion that the 111th Congress' successes were timid. When it came to the rephrased critique of simply papering over problems rather than attacking root issues the conversation was more genial and with some overall agreement to the point.
It was a pretty nifty interview. Not quite softball, but definitely well on that side of the scale. Still, Stewart pressed on some issue which were kind of nice to see discussed. It's just too bad most of the answers were canned, but then that's what you do when you're President. Plus I'm sure TDS doesn't want to piss off anybody since they're far more of a captive audience than the 3 actual news networks + PBS in terms of drawing guests.
The basic criticism though isn't that nothing has been passed, in fact this Congressional session has passed the most legislation since LBJ, but instead that everything that has passed is significantly to the right of equivalent bill's say Nixon proposed. So yes alot of bills that do help out "average" American's have been passed so long as we are willing to define help as create moderate free market restrictions in comparison to any other industrialized nation.
The basic criticism though isn't that nothing has been passed, in fact this Congressional session has passed the most legislation since LBJ, but instead that everything that has passed is significantly to the right of equivalent bill's say Nixon proposed. So yes a lot of bills that do help out "average" American's have been passed so long as we are willing to define help as create moderate free market restrictions in comparison to any other industrialized nation.
You mean if we were to define 'progress' as an improvement over the status quo?
Sure I agree, but the question offered generally is why only X+1 and not say X+3? Which has never been seriously answered. Further on at least heath care we know that the White house preempted anything beyond X+1 by not arguing for any of it in the pre-house debate sit downs with industry heads.
I don't think he was agitated by the fact that it was criticism, but more finally saying something back to all the non stop "you all have accomplished NOTHING!!!!" that comes from the dem base. Essentially, he got annoyed and put the brakes on to say bullshit, here's what we did, and that's no small feat.
And I agree. I would have LIKED a lot more, but it would be completely unfair for me to call what they have accomplished so far minor. I'm positive it's been a long standing annoyance with the White House that the dem base pretty much completely ignores progress as it's expected, and instead just constantly harps on what didn't pass.
On the one hand: make him (them) do it. On the other hand: VOTE, geniuses.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Ah the former is the question creating the furor and mostly because it seems intractably difficult to push any genuine economically progressive legislation since well the '80s really. The latter is a given though with the shades of proto-fascist anger haunting us.
Momento Mori on
0
Options
BarcardiAll the WizardsUnder A Rock: AfganistanRegistered Userregular
edited October 2010
Anyone that wants to learn debate and especially how body language works when between two people should watch this discussion. 2 Brilliant people in that aspect. I liked the interview.
I'm also expecting a lot of "Why was President Obama on a talk show, why wasn't he on OUR talk show" or "Why wasn't he being beaten with sticks by Republicans"
Jintor on
0
Options
BarcardiAll the WizardsUnder A Rock: AfganistanRegistered Userregular
edited October 2010
Anyone remember the Stewart/o'reilly interviews this past month or so, when they were spatting over whos book would be #1... well, o'reilly was while stewart was off about trying to convert him to the sane side of the media.
Anyhow Earth: The Book, currently #1 nonfiction, the o'reilly book isnt on the (meaningful part of the) bestseller list.
tldr: watch the O'Reilly Factor tomorrow for double the bitterness.
I got Earth from the library today. I think it's not as funny as America was, but I'm a pretty obsessed political type. It's much less actively Daily Show-y.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Jon was about as aggressive as I think a person could be without being abrasive. The judo between the two of them as Jon kept pressing about the disparity between campaign promises and results was pretty fun to watch.
Anyone remember the Stewart/o'reilly interviews this past month or so, when they were spatting over whos book would be #1... well, o'reilly was while stewart was off about trying to convert him to the sane side of the media.
Anyhow Earth: The Book, currently #1 nonfiction, the o'reilly book isnt on the (meaningful part of the) bestseller list.
tldr: watch the O'Reilly Factor tomorrow for double the bitterness.
The only thing more pathetic than goading the other side to play by your rules is subsequently losing by those rules.
As much as I'm sure we'd all love to see this truth transcended, the fact is this is not the time a president can really be interviewed for piercing insight and and full-bodied wisdom acknowledging all the real problems, like in a documentary twenty years hence. It's a freaking election, the candidates have to be political, and given that I think Obama and Jon's dialogging were fine. Could have been a normal interview length, but I also feel like Obama has done enough that he does deserve recognition and the chance to keep going. Who the fuck's going to really be able to do better with the system we've got? I for one am not at all disillusioned with Obama, but then that's probably because I'm kind of a pessimist about things overall. I don't expect shit to get done but I expect the president to try his best. As a layman that's really all I can hope for.
Given all that, the Jordan interview and some others were assuredly more interesting.
I have to say I was severely disappointed with this interview. The Daily Show has done several segments containing serious policy critiques of the financial rescue, health care reform, and civil rights issues. So we know they have a wealth of knowledge to draw on, and yet Jon asked only a very half-hearted "Ya think you might have bit off more than you can chew?" several different ways to the President. Worse as several people here have noticed Barack Obama was visibly agitated by even this the most mild form of true criticism.
Barack's defense of Summers was especially troubling as what he said was when translated from economic speak was essentially "I came into a apocalyptic mess and all the smartest people I know suggested Mr. Summers ideas based on Saltwater economic ideology shouldn't be challenged while the roof is falling in." Which means he either agree's with saltwater/supply side assumptions or he was too in awe of the magnitude of the problem to question the philosophy that constructed the crisis.
President Obama's attempts to mask a genuine difference of opinion with the claim that it wasn't practical belies multiple occasions where he didn't even try which Jon had pointed out at the time, but in the interview just let slide. I get the Jon likes Barack and is definitely allowed to be nervous to nail the President especially in a way that could depress democratic turnout or make his attempt to foster "reasonablness" look kinda of hypocritical. That said we need journalists to hold officials accountable, and the Daily Show team has the chops to do that so I am disappointed that this is what we got instead.
"Saltwater/supply side"? Saltwater as I understand the term is the east coast mainstream, closer to Keynesian.
Jon was almost right. Congress hasn't been timid about trying to pass legislation, but Congress/Obama has been timid about telling people what they have done and why it's good for the country.
Posts
i thought it was the internet combining Ayn Rand and Ron Paul to portray the Teaparty
this sounds like a thing you are making up
I get that its halloween and everything but...
It's considerably closer than it should be. Had Rand lost the primary to the guy whose name I forget, Conway would be down 20.
I'm not, though that sucks. I'm talking about things like government transparency and privacy rights and getting shit like Gitmo dealt with.
kpop appreciation station i also like to tweet some
Yep! Because the ABO is daggum gubment!
But, see, it works, because you can trust Rand Paul is a good Ophthalmologist, because he's registered with the National Board of Ophthalmology. And you can trust the National Board of Ophthalmology, because it was founded by a registered Ophthalmologist!
Fun with circles is fun!
Wasn't the Gitmo thing more of a case of every single politician in america suddenly realizing that former afghani taxi drivers were criminal masterminds on par with the batman rogue's gallery and thus american prisons were not enough to hold them?
Barack's defense of Summers was especially troubling as what he said was when translated from economic speak was essentially "I came into a apocalyptic mess and all the smartest people I know suggested Mr. Summers ideas based on Saltwater economic ideology shouldn't be challenged while the roof is falling in." Which means he either agree's with saltwater/supply side assumptions or he was too in awe of the magnitude of the problem to question the philosophy that constructed the crisis.
President Obama's attempts to mask a genuine difference of opinion with the claim that it wasn't practical belies multiple occasions where he didn't even try which Jon had pointed out at the time, but in the interview just let slide. I get the Jon likes Barack and is definitely allowed to be nervous to nail the President especially in a way that could depress democratic turnout or make his attempt to foster "reasonablness" look kinda of hypocritical. That said we need journalists to hold officials accountable, and the Daily Show team has the chops to do that so I am disappointed that this is what we got instead.
And I agree. I would have LIKED a lot more, but it would be completely unfair for me to call what they have accomplished so far minor. I'm positive it's been a long standing annoyance with the White House that the dem base pretty much completely ignores progress as it's expected, and instead just constantly harps on what didn't pass.
It was a pretty nifty interview. Not quite softball, but definitely well on that side of the scale. Still, Stewart pressed on some issue which were kind of nice to see discussed. It's just too bad most of the answers were canned, but then that's what you do when you're President. Plus I'm sure TDS doesn't want to piss off anybody since they're far more of a captive audience than the 3 actual news networks + PBS in terms of drawing guests.
You mean if we were to define 'progress' as an improvement over the status quo?
On the one hand: make him (them) do it. On the other hand: VOTE, geniuses.
http://www.bloomberg.com/video/63932062/
somehow cnn in my life has been replaced by bloomberg, they are old school business
Mostly thinking of when Obama said he would continue doing his agenda as long as he was president of the united states.
Prediction: "OBAMA SAYS HE WILL CONTINUE TO RAM TAXES AND SPENDING DOWN YOUR THROAT!~!!"
PSN: ShogunGunshow
Origin: ShogunGunshow
So whatever the opposite of that is. In reality though, we should not care what they say. Yet we do.
Oh they'll definitely say Jon was way too soft on Obama.
There will be a lot of "If I got to interview the president, I would have said [insert hardball posturing here]"
Anyhow Earth: The Book, currently #1 nonfiction, the o'reilly book isnt on the (meaningful part of the) bestseller list.
tldr: watch the O'Reilly Factor tomorrow for double the bitterness.
PSN: ShogunGunshow
Origin: ShogunGunshow
The only thing more pathetic than goading the other side to play by your rules is subsequently losing by those rules.
Steam: pazython
Given all that, the Jordan interview and some others were assuredly more interesting.
"Saltwater/supply side"? Saltwater as I understand the term is the east coast mainstream, closer to Keynesian.
kpop appreciation station i also like to tweet some