Obama Obama Obama

[whometense]

On McLaughlin Group, on the News Hour it was Obama Clinton nonstop.

I just keep thinking about the 2004 election cycle, and how completely wrong all the pundits were. I don't think they've gotten any smarter since then. Pat Buchanan actually made an astute comment on McLaughlin - someone said all the democrats are in love with Obama - and Buchanan answered something to the effect that, no, all the liberal press was in love with Obama. I dunno - he seems like a good guy and all, but in my experience the more heady the infatuation, the more pronounced the feet of clay when the first flaw is discovered - and it will be discovered. But I guess we'll see. Next week on the Hardball College Tour - Robert De Niro and Matt Damon promoting their new movie - and Obama.

Mark Shields made the most idiotic argument I've heard in a long time on the News Hour - he said that since Bush's cabinet was arguably the most experience in history, and the biggest failure, that made the argument for Obama. Here's the transcript: judge for yourself.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec06/sb_12-15.html

MARK SHIELDS: But the other thing, Jim -- one of the great ironies, the political contemporary ironies is that Donald Rumsfeld, chief of staff at the White House, secretary of defense, you know, CEO, as David pointed out, member of Congress, Dick Cheney, member of Congress, leader of the Congress, White House chief of staff, secretary of defense, vice president, Colin Powell, national security adviser, Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman, secretary of state, arguably the most experienced foreign policy, national security team we've ever had, and a disaster of epic, historic proportions.

It makes the case for Barack Obama. I mean, you know, experience in this case...

JIM LEHRER: Didn't work?

MARK SHIELDS: ... did not pay off for the country.

Is it just me, or wow, is that stupid? Just because Bush's cabinet made a mess of everything, next time we need to go for someone inexperienced? The mind boggles. I used to have a modicum of respect for Mark Shields, but good god.

[wildflowergardener]

1. logic

logic seems to have escaped them.

That is not the first thing that comes to my mind - gee the ones in there now are experienced - what we need is an inexperienced person for a change.

What I want is an experienced person, who listens to other people for their thoughts before making a decision - is willing to change their mind - know anyone like that?

Meg

[whometense]

2. Um, yeah.

As a matter of fact, I do.

It's a good thing the voters don't appear to take the blatherers seriously - if they did, in 2004 it would have been Dean in a walk, since he was the sure winner.

[Island Blue]

3. Wow - stupid doesn't even begin to describe it.

They're comparing Obama to the Bush II cabinet and not to Bush II himself. The only way Bush II could have had less foreign policy experience is if he had been living in a cave, under a rock, by himself for the past 50 years of his life. How's THE PRESIDENT'S* foreign policy inexperience working out for us? They're comparing apples to oranges here.

My guess is that since Obama will be the media's Golden Boy until the Republicans crown their own Golden Boy, then all bets are off.

[karynnj]

4. What a dumb statement

I guess it shows that having to speak about essentially nothing (the political game versus issues), eventually they are speaking without really thinking.

Your subject "Obama, Obama, Obama" made me think immediately of "Dean, Dean, Dean" from 2003.

[JI7]

5. no surprise coming from him

he is the same one that said in 2004 during the Primaries after Edwards dropped out that the passion is gone from the presidential race or some other shit like that.

and then AFTER the november elections he came out with some nice article on Kerry and his relationship with a kid he hired.

he is typical of the idiot "Dem" pundits on tv.

[ProSense]

6. Sheer idiocy! They were experienced in

shady dealings with corrupt individuals, some criminals!

[MBS]

7. oh, you're exactly on target

All your points were great. .but especially this : "Just because Bush's cabinet made a mess of everything, next time we need to go for someone inexperienced?. The mind boggles."
Yesterday, Obama made remarks about HIMSELF that echoed Mark Shields!!! If I can track down the exact quote, I'll post it. But it was along the lines of "experience isn't everything; you hire advisors for that".
The last 6 years inevitably came to mind: haven't we already been through this movie???

[whometense]

8. I heard that Obama comment;

I think it was exactly why Shields's comment made an instantaneous - and negative - impression on me.

[MBS]

12. Here's Obama on himself

On re-reading the Liberal Values article from Ron (who provided the link to the Obama interview) I learned that I mixed up who said what.

1. First, Ron's article, and the comments that follow, are worth reading. See http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=765#comments (Thank you for response #5 , KJ! Excerpts from her comment here: "I was with a group of women writers the other day looking at pictures a friend of ours took of her trip to China and Tibet, when one of the women leaned over and whispered, “Who do you think we’ll get?” I looked at her and said, “Obama is too green, I’m betting on Kerry.” She nodded and said, 'Obama to too young and inexperienced.'It’s amazing such shorthand exists… but it does. Another couple, my husband and I are going to meet up with this woman and her husband after they return from a trip to London (it’s great to have friends that travel!) and I imagine it will be a wide open opportunity to talk politics and who’s the best candidate to back in 2008.This woman is a known writer in KC with contacts out the wazoo. I love the chances to offer information about who I think best represents our chances in 08 to people like her. Sorry Obama, you don’t make the cut… yet. Call in a few years.")

2. From the Chicago Tribune interview with Obama: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0612150327dec15,1,7823782.story?page=1&coll=chi-news-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true
Obama's comments are generally more reasonable than those of gushing reporters.
____Excerpts below:
"Asked how he would address the issue of his relative lack of experience, Obama said he thought that the campaign itself--how he managed it, his position on issues and his framing of a vision for the country--would answer the question. "That experience question would be answered at the end of the campaign," he said.
"The test of leadership in my mind is not going to be what's on a paper resume," Obama said. Vice President Dick Cheney, a former defense secretary, and departing Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld 'had the best resume on paper of any foreign policy team and the result has been what I consider to be one of the biggest foreign policy mistakes in our history," he said.
. . .
"Obama said, however, that he had no interest in being what he called "the un-Hillary"--a reference to serving as a standard-bearer for Democrats looking for an alternative to Clinton."
In the interview, he also discusses the infamous land deal, acknowledges that he's not yet faced intense scrutiny, feels he'd be a "viable candidate" and could come up with the necessary staffing and money, is weighing effect of possible run on his family.. .

3. Chicago SunTimes interview with Obama:http://www.suntimes.com/news/174143,CST-NWS-sweet15.article
"The Illinois Democrat told the Sun-Times he has concluded a 2008 White House bid 'would be viable' and he would have 'a pretty good chance of winning the nomination.'"

4. The comments I'd ascribed to Obama actually came from Rosa Brooks in LA Times oped section (see http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-brooks15dec15,0,6358191.column?coll=la-opinion-center):
"In any case, experience, like charisma, can be overrated. A good president doesn't have to know everything about everything. (If he doesn't know anything about anything, of course, that's no good. We're still trapped in an unhappy national experiment with a guy in that category.) Good presidents strike a balance: They learn all they can, then appoint smart, thoughtful aides, people who can fill in the gaps in their own knowledge and serve as honest brokers. At the end of the day, good presidents need the judgment and common sense necessary to make tough decisions. But to get there, they need to know how to listen and how to nurture, rather than crush, dissenting voices.
"In his two years in the Senate, Obama has already earned a reputation for doing just that. Like every good leader, he knows what he doesn't know . . "

[Inuca]

9. Speaking of Obama-related stupid statements

mind-boggling stupid, that is... did anybody else see Margaret Carlson (do I have the name right?), I think it was MSNBC either yesterday or before yesterday. Anyway, the topic was Obama (of course), and she was commenting on his foreign policy experience. She may have mentioned that he is in the corresponding Senate committee, I do not remember, what I DO remember are the following two arguments she gave in support, one that he spend part of his childhood abroad, and two that that's what his undergraduate degree is in (BA in foreign policy? never heard of, not that it matters). I simply could not believe my ears!!! I usually am somewhat reluctant to jump on the "all the pundits are idiots" bandwagon, but I may have to reconsider.

[wisteria]

10. She used to be fair and sensible, now she seems to be a mouth piece.

She mouths the CW and rides the hype. I just am stunned when I think her and other "knowledgeable pundits" get paid to talk bullsh*t.

[cadmium]

13. She has sounded pretty much like Washington

cocktail party hack for a few years.

By the way I am actually enjoying Obamamania--so far. There is a fun element plus he is turning out to be pretty good at getting our message out.

He really is annoying some right-wing pundits. That is always a good thing.

[JI7]

14. I hope Obama enters the race

i think he needs to do better in foreign policy area. but even with that i would like for him to get in. he will add to it in certain ways .

[Island Blue]

11. JK also spent part of his childhood abroad.

I must have missed it when the pundints tried to spin that in his favor during the '04 campaign. :crazy:

[BlueIris]

15. I just...do these people know *anything* about Obama?

I'm...not a fan, but I have read up on his life and record. The man isn't going to abandon his constituents to try to be president (or VP) in 2008. He's also just as brilliant as the next elected official and is well aware that the current media push behind him is a right wing attempt to obscure the efforts of valid potential nominees. Also? He might be playing along for now, but how can the pundits not think he's going to call their bluff and you know, announce that he's not going to run? I mean, I know, they have their orders, from complete morons, but come on.

I can't figure out what's going on here, apart from desperate "anybody but Kerry" spin from the MSM. Because it feels almost too desperate.

[cadmium]

16. too desperate is right.

Once Edwards gets in I bet they turn the spotlight off Obama at least for a while

I get the feeling like you that Obama is similarly skeptical.

I like the fact that he smokes (so I have heard)--It shows a nice defiant streak.

[Inuca]

17. Yep, he smokes

or at least that's what some pundit or another said a few days ago, and mentioning it as a "negative", something he will have to take care of if he decides to run. I know I am not very objective on this (I smoke too), but is smoking so politically incorrect that it became akin to a character flaw?

[karynnj]

18. I think it is odd that the fact that he smokes got so much attention

I don't think it is really that significant - I have never seen a photo of him with a cigarette, so you can't say he is a bad example. I don't buy the idea that it is to define a "weakness" - that people will then accept anbd say that it doesn't change their opinion.

I like Obama - but like everyone else know very little. His record is clearly prgressive, he is a nice person (from someone from Chicago who knows him very superficially via their respective children), and he seems ok but not spectacular from seeing him on the SFRC. I do think I know enough to support him over Edwards or Hillary.