Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Ruth Marcus: Inartful, but Honest

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:29 AM
Original message
Ruth Marcus: Inartful, but Honest
Edited on Wed Aug-11-10 07:36 AM by babylonsister
Read the whole thing, you 'nattering nabobs of negativism/carping cavilers of cyberspace'. :D


Inartful, but Honest
By Ruth Marcus


WASHINGTON -- I'm with Gibbs.

At times I've found White House press secretary Robert Gibbs to be unnecessarily irascible, and maybe his lashing out at the constant grumbling of the "professional left" wasn't the best tactic. You want the base worked up -- but for you, not about you.

Nonetheless, his basic point was spot on: The complainers from the left are, in some combination, myopic, forgetful and deranged.

Gibbs is far from the only White House official with these frustrations, but he's the first to share them on the record and, therefore, the first to walk them back. He issued a statement longer than the original offending words acknowledging that he may have spoken "inartfully" -- which is Washington-speak for honestly -- and confessing to watching "too much cable."

That last part may be true. As to the rest of it -- Gibbs was right the first time.

"I hear these people saying he's like George Bush. Those people ought to be drug tested," Gibbs told The Hill's Sam Youngman, in an interview published Tuesday. "I mean, it's crazy."

This "professional left," he added, "will be satisfied when we have Canadian health care and we've eliminated the Pentagon. That's not reality."

Indeed, for all the derision from the left about the Bush administration not being "reality-based," many lefty bloggers and talking heads have failed to be reality-based in assessing the Obama administration.

Health care reform, in this glass-half-empty world, is a disappointment because it lacks a public option. The president's failure to close Guantanamo or end the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy is a betrayal. If only President Obama was willing to bang heads, name names, stand tough, he would have been able to get -- fill in the blank -- a bigger stimulus, tougher financial reform, new legislation to help unions organize.

Excuse me, but can these people not count to 60? Have they somehow failed to notice that Mitch McConnell and John Boehner have not exactly been playing nice? That while the left laments Obama's minor deviations from party orthodoxy, the right has been portraying him, with some success, as an out-of-control socialist?

more...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/08/11/gi...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ellie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:31 AM
Response to Original message
1. Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:31 AM
Response to Original message
2. Yep- we're deranged now!
Edited on Wed Aug-11-10 07:32 AM by depakid
That's even more helpful.

Maybe wild eyed would have been a better description

Republicans- from their favorite site are just laughing their asses off.

And rightly so-
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WI_DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #2
33. So you see yourself as one of those Gibbs was talking about?
are you one of those who say Obama=Bush because if you aren't then he isn't talking about you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 09:04 AM
Response to Reply #33
36. Obama is Bush when he follows and/or furthers Bush policies
Edited on Wed Aug-11-10 09:17 AM by depakid
So in that sense- in those contexts, looking at facts (as opposed to hopes or wishes) - I do think that. Who wouldn't?

Of course, I'm in the middle of an election in a far away country- working for a party whose values and beliefs mirror my own. Ever heard of pre-polling? I hadn't either- and yet, there I go- low man on the totem pole, asking what to some might seem like stupid questions, staffing the booths, and doing whatever else I can to help.

So no- Gibbs wasn't talking "about me" (or really- anyone else) so much as he was disclosing things about himself and what he and his circle hear, talk about and feel in private.

He slipped up and made it public, though many astute observers have already figured out for themselves how it is, based on the record.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:33 AM
Response to Original message
3. K&R...nt
Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:37 AM
Response to Original message
4. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:41 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. If that was supposed to be an insult, it fell way short.
Edited on Wed Aug-11-10 07:43 AM by babylonsister
ProSense contributes more here than most DUers, certainly more than your 'nattering nabobs of negativism'. And you proved Marcus' point indirectly. Kind of funny you didn't even bother to address the article but chose to attack a Dem on DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:43 AM
Response to Reply #4
9. Shitty personal attack.
:thumbsdown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
catgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:43 AM
Response to Reply #4
10. Both great and respected DUers

Thanks Babylonsister!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
30rock Donating Member (115 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #10
31. Agree@the respected part n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
impik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:40 AM
Response to Original message
5. Gibbs was 1000% right. The professional left can kiss Obama's b****
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:41 AM
Response to Original message
7. Truth.
"...many lefty bloggers and talking heads have failed to be reality-based in assessing the Obama administration."

That's not even debateable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
30rock Donating Member (115 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:42 AM
Response to Original message
8. What? The lady who doesn't want Bush/Cheney prosecuted dislikes the Left?
Edited on Wed Aug-11-10 07:43 AM by 30rock
Shocker. You know we're moving away from the liberal side of the spsectrum when we start quoting Ruth Marcus.

Coming up: Rush Limbaugh disagrees with Dennis Kucinich.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:43 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. LOL! Attack the messenger. Classic. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:46 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. That was a dumb piece, sis
not helpful- and quite frankly- beneath how you generally are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:45 AM
Response to Reply #8
12. Did you even read the commentary?
It's not about "disliking" the Left. It's about sticking to reality-based political debate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
30rock Donating Member (115 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:47 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. Have you ever asked Greenwald haters to read his pieces prior to commenting?
Or does it only apply to Marcus et. al?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:50 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. Did you even read this OP, or are you just invested in
attacking whomever writes them? You certainly haven't contributed to any kind of discussion of what was written.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
30rock Donating Member (115 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:51 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. Have you ever asked Greenwald haters to read his pieces prior to commenting?
?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. What are you, a broken record? I let people do what they want.
I have no control over what or who they read. You don't either, despite what you might think! :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
30rock Donating Member (115 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:56 AM
Response to Reply #19
23. When I don't get answers, I become a broken record
Why not just give me the link of those instances where you scolded people for attacking Greenwald personally while ignoring the content of what he writes? Then my record will become unbroken.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 08:03 AM
Response to Reply #23
28. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 08:10 AM
Response to Reply #19
30. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:52 AM
Response to Reply #15
18. First "Lefty Haters" and now "Greenwald haters"?
Feeling victimized much?

Lighten up.

We're on the same team ... I think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
30rock Donating Member (115 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:54 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. I guess your answer is no
Have you condemned ad-hominem attacks against Greenwald of people who don't read column? Ir is it only a Marcus-related rule that we must not speak about her background?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tularetom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:47 AM
Response to Original message
14. That counting to 60 bullshit gets tiresome
If Harry Reid had ever actually made the republicans filibuster instead of folding every time they say the word, and things were still the same as they are now, then that statement would have some validity.

And as far as McConnell and Boner not playing nice, why should they? They figured out they could get more by acting like assholes than by negotiating. And it's worked out pretty well for them up to now.

Finally the right is going to portray Obama as an out of control socialist no matter what. So he may as well do what he thinks is right instead of attempting to placatre them.

That article makes no sense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:55 AM
Response to Reply #14
22. It might be tiresome, but do let us know how to overcome them.
afaik, those are the rules we've all come to hate, but I don't know what to do about them. In the meantime, you have no clue what Reid does, and dismissing the rethugs doesn't change the reality of how they've affected what's not been accomplished.

You make no sense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tularetom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 08:27 AM
Response to Reply #22
32. That's crap. Proposing namby pamby middle of the road policies
and then compromising on them is no way to effect the "change" they promised. How many actual filibusters have you seen?

FWIW I was skeptical right from the start this administration would be able to accomplish much, but Obama wanted the job and he was a bazillion times better than the alternative.

But in the final analysis, what the "professional left" says or does makes little difference at this point in time. The administration and by extension Democratic congressional candidates are going to be judged by one thing and that is the economy. They had their chance and in the opinion of a lot of voters they blew it. People who didn't have jobs in 2008, still don't have them. And a lot of people who did then, don't now.

Gibbs and Ruth Marcus can blame the "looney left" forever but it isn't the left that's going to desert them. It's the unemployed voter, regardless of political affiliation that they should worry about.

And try not to be so defensive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fasttense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:54 AM
Response to Original message
21. Really are we that far out of touch with reality?
Look at the example Gibbs gives, Canadian health-care.

Really Canadian health-care is just so far, far left, just so out there in wing nut territory? Do lefty bloggers really think the US could ever really have a system of health-care that doesn't cost you your house to pay for a minor surgery? Do lefty really think the US could have a minor increase in taxes to pay for medical care? Are they crazy? Are they mad? What has gotten into them to think the US could or would ever get Canadian style health-care. Why it's just plain un-American.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:58 AM
Response to Reply #21
25. That went right over your head.
Gibbs was saying we might want it, but the healthcare Canadians enjoy was not attainable for us and isn't reality-based.

Sadly, he's right. Tell me how many rethugs wanted to vote for the public option, or even Dems for that matter. Not a majority.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #25
38. No. You said that. He said those who desire such universal
health care 'will never be happy' and need to be drug tested. If we had at least gotten a strong public option there would be far less discontent in that area, so it is irrational to claim what Gibbs is claiming.
He also fails to point out the reasons it is hard for us to get decent and just health care established in the US. He presents it as if he is opposed to Canadian style, and as if the reforms were far better than they are. He's delusional, and making stuff up.
Irresponsible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:58 AM
Response to Original message
24. She lost me with the right-wing Fox news term "reality based"
It's an idiiotic talking point that is used by Fox and Republicans to put down anyone whose perception of "reality" does not match theirs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #24
26. Funny, I've heard the term 'reality-based' outside of faux.
I must have, because I never watch that sorry excuse for a network. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phleshdef Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 08:40 AM
Response to Reply #24
35. That word use to get thrown around on Air America all the time.
Edited on Wed Aug-11-10 08:40 AM by phleshdef
Not even close to being a right wing Fox news term.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 08:01 AM
Response to Original message
27. Myopia, forgetfulness and derangement
I get 1000% of my minimum daily requirements for those things that around here.

K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 08:03 AM
Response to Original message
29. It's not the 60 vote hurdle, it's the failure to lead on healthcare, finreg and worrisome escalation
in Afghanistan that's perhaps showing in Gibb's defensive and odd attack on the 'professional left.'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 08:37 AM
Response to Original message
34. Honest? Except for the made up quotes that no one ever
said. Gibbs said he was speaking of cable news, and none of his defenders has yet to show where any 'professional' called for closing the Pentagon, or any of the fantasies Gibbs put forth. Hyperbole is not honest, making up stuff and claiming that you 'hear it all the time' when you can not cite examples is called gossip, mendacity, the politicians call it 'spin' people call it lying.
Anyone who can show quotes from the 'liberal media' that call for closing the Pentagon, please, share with me. I do not see them all, so maybe I missed it. Gibbs said many do it, and he hears it all the time. But even one example from the professional media would be nice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #34
37. Anyone? Where are the quotes and cites to prove the honest?
I've asked in so many defense of Gibbs threads, and no one has an answer. Who said these alleged things? Which liberal media professionals? Marcus adds 'some bloggers' but she also fails to say who she means, what they actually said with which she takes issue. Straw man. Insinuations. Implications. But no facts, no names, no examples. Craven, dishonest, and down right McCarthyite.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud Liberal Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-11-10 09:29 AM
Response to Original message
39. My take on the whole Gibbs thing:
First off, I think that, artful or inartful, Gibbs was just venting and that whatever he said was his way of blowing off steam at left-wing critics of the administration. I'm not suggesting that people have to like it or agree with it or even that they shouldn't be offended but only that people shouldn't take his words at face value. In other words, he's NOT telling anybody that they need to march in lockstep with the administration on everything or they're using drugs and they need drug tests.
Second off, as to the substance of what he said, there are people out there- I don't know if they belong to the "professional left" (whoever that includes) or not- that DO seem to believe that Obama more or less=Bush II. It's not typically phrased that way exactly nor does anybody come right out and say that but it seems pretty undeniable to me that that is the message that some people are seriously trying to convey. I will concede that, in some instances and on some policies, he has not been aggressive enough in reversing or rolling Bush-era policies back and people are entitled to question it and be critical of it. However, anybody equating Obama with Bush II and/or suggesting that things would've been little different with McCain in the WH now is (if not on drugs) definitely NOT living in reality and, even if it is not being said directly, it is most definitely being heavily implied by some people IMHO.
Additionally, I believe that it is unfair to blame President Obama for his lack of progress in some areas just during his first 1-2 years in office or to assume that just because he hasn't done something yet on an issue or two that he's "betrayed" us already. I also think that the lack of progress on some fronts (i.e. Gitmo) should not be laid solely at Obama's feet when even some members of his own party in Congress are making it more difficult for him to achieve what he wants to achieve and, yes, there most definitely ARE limitations on what he can "do" to unruly Democratic Representatives and Senators. I should also point out that his fighting his *evil* Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel over his recommendation that Obama agree to military tribunals for Gitmo detainees in exchange for Republican support for closing Gitmo should be a huge credit to him sticking with his principles. Of course, there were even some on the left who didn't think he was doing enough by closing Gitmo and criticized him for his plan to send the detainees to Supermax prisons instead, so it's kind of hard not to see how the reaction of some people to his efforts to do something positive might just get a little frustrating to him and/or his administration.
As to Gibbs' comments about Canadian (single payer) Healthcare and closing the Pentagon, I think that Gibbs was being hyperbolic (people do tend to do that when they get frustrated) but (I think) he was trying to make the point that some people are flat out refusing to acknowledge the progress that the administration has made towards health care reform and ending Bush's wars and instead choosing to focus on the administration's *failure* to achieve politically/technically unachievable goals of adopting a single payer health care system and/or bringing home all of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan yesterday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Aug 27th 2014, 06:52 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC