View Full Version : The Bully Pulpit and economic recovery
Source is here (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/04/AR2009020403174_pf.html).
The Action Americans Need
By Barack Obama
Thursday, February 5, 2009; A17
By now, it's clear to everyone that we have inherited an economic crisis as deep and dire as any since the days of the Great Depression. Millions of jobs that Americans relied on just a year ago are gone; millions more of the nest eggs families worked so hard to build have vanished. People everywhere are worried about what tomorrow will bring.
What Americans expect from Washington is action that matches the urgency they feel in their daily lives -- action that's swift, bold and wise enough for us to climb out of this crisis.
Because each day we wait to begin the work of turning our economy around, more people lose their jobs, their savings and their homes. And if nothing is done, this recession might linger for years. Our economy will lose 5 million more jobs. Unemployment will approach double digits. Our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse.
That's why I feel such a sense of urgency about the recovery plan before Congress. With it, we will create or save more than 3 million jobs over the next two years, provide immediate tax relief to 95 percent of American workers, ignite spending by businesses and consumers alike, and take steps to strengthen our country for years to come.
This plan is more than a prescription for short-term spending -- it's a strategy for America's long-term growth and opportunity in areas such as renewable energy, health care and education. And it's a strategy that will be implemented with unprecedented transparency and accountability, so Americans know where their tax dollars are going and how they are being spent.
In recent days, there have been misguided criticisms of this plan that echo the failed theories that helped lead us into this crisis -- the notion that tax cuts alone will solve all our problems; that we can meet our enormous tests with half-steps and piecemeal measures; that we can ignore fundamental challenges such as energy independence and the high cost of health care and still expect our economy and our country to thrive.
I reject these theories, and so did the American people when they went to the polls in November and voted resoundingly for change. They know that we have tried it those ways for too long. And because we have, our health-care costs still rise faster than inflation. Our dependence on foreign oil still threatens our economy and our security. Our children still study in schools that put them at a disadvantage. We've seen the tragic consequences when our bridges crumble and our levees fail.
Every day, our economy gets sicker -- and the time for a remedy that puts Americans back to work, jump-starts our economy and invests in lasting growth is now.
Now is the time to protect health insurance for the more than 8 million Americans at risk of losing their coverage and to computerize the health-care records of every American within five years, saving billions of dollars and countless lives in the process.
Now is the time to save billions by making 2 million homes and 75 percent of federal buildings more energy-efficient, and to double our capacity to generate alternative sources of energy within three years.
Now is the time to give our children every advantage they need to compete by upgrading 10,000 schools with state-of-the-art classrooms, libraries and labs; by training our teachers in math and science; and by bringing the dream of a college education within reach for millions of Americans.
And now is the time to create the jobs that remake America for the 21st century by rebuilding aging roads, bridges and levees; designing a smart electrical grid; and connecting every corner of the country to the information superhighway.
These are the actions Americans expect us to take without delay. They're patient enough to know that our economic recovery will be measured in years, not months. But they have no patience for the same old partisan gridlock that stands in the way of action while our economy continues to slide.
So we have a choice to make. We can once again let Washington's bad habits stand in the way of progress. Or we can pull together and say that in America, our destiny isn't written for us but by us. We can place good ideas ahead of old ideological battles, and a sense of purpose above the same narrow partisanship. We can act boldly to turn crisis into opportunity and, together, write the next great chapter in our history and meet the test of our time.
The writer is president of the United States.
I have never appreciated nor understood the president's habitual efforts to discourage and to derail honest political debate by labeling such discourse as "narrow partisanship" especially when he presents his political party's agenda for public policy as "good ideas ahead of old ideological battles."
I have never appreciated nor understood the president's habitual efforts to discourage and to derail honest political debate by labeling such discourse as "narrow partisanship" especially when he presents his political party's agenda for public policy as "good ideas ahead of old ideological battles."
I suspect he has no interest in debate; rather, he wants to win. The question that nags at the back of the mind is how far he will go to win.
Is ACORN an organization that seeks debate and synthesis of optimal solutions? Or do they simply seek to advance their agenda?
Consider the following from the Wall Street Journal:
Therein lies the opportunity for President-elect Barack Obama. His plans for an activist government agenda are in many ways being given a boost by this crisis atmosphere and the nearly universal call for the government to do something fast to stimulate the economy.
This opportunity isn't lost on the new president and his team. "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste," Rahm Emanuel, Mr. Obama's new chief of staff, told a Wall Street Journal conference of top corporate chief executives this week.
He elaborated: "Things that we had postponed for too long, that were long-term, are now immediate and must be dealt with. This crisis provides the opportunity for us to do things that you could not do before."
LINK (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122721278056345271.html?mod=igoogle_wsj_gadgv1&)
Trying to ram this package through and scaring people is nothing short of high pressure sales tactics just like when you buy that car. The salesman wants you to buy it now without taking the time to consider all your options. He might be trying to sell you options you don't need and you might find a better deal if you don't sign on the dotted line right now.
You always make informed and wise decisions when you take your time, and for whatever their motivation some don't want that to happen.
"...... This crisis provides the opportunity for us to do things that you could not do before."
And there you have it. :mad:
The example of leadership in this editorial by our CinC and his change so far, is to metophorically yell fire. This action of our newly minted cheif excutive distracts the people (and congress) from logical, reasoned and deliberate decision into a mass panic, rush to action and / or exit. I hope our CinC and his staff understand that panic guided from the top is a recipe for unintended consequence. If they truly have the peoples common good in mind, they may want to start tempering their comments and statements. I pray our fellow citizens recognize that crisis (real or imagined) can afford those in power the chance to make rapid change in the type of governence. The use of crisis, has always been the way forward for facist, socialist, marxist and other totalitarian regimes to gain power and absolute control. Our country has many citizens that do understand the constitutiion of our republic, but they are the minority. I for one will support our elected leaders, TO INCLUDE OUR NEW EXECUTIVE, until such time that they trample upon the Constitution of the United States and the rights of our states and people. I beleive our CinC is acting in a reckless manner with this rhetoric. I hope it is only to make limited ideologic changes and not change the type of governance and the opportunities we all have enjoyed (or bled for). The sheep are skitish and the sheepdogs need to be on guard.
I dont understand, with an easy majority in both the house and the senate why is the POTUS having such a hard time leading his own party to victory in this ugly fight against partisan republican politicians that are just trying to destroy the country...
I dont understand, with an easy majority in both the house and the senate why is the POTUS having such a hard time leading his own party to victory in this ugly fight against partisan republican politicians that are just trying to destroy the country...
Make no mistake, he has the votes to ram this through. The problem is that they are all Democratic Votes, and the POTUS in no way wants to sling this albatross across the neck of his party only, because when it fails, and it will, they will only have themselves to blame.
If he brings a few Republicans over to his side, then it becomes a "Bipartisan" stimulus package, hence when it fails he can say the Republicans were just as guilty as the Dems.
This is all about mid-term elections, in my mind. I hope the Republicans hold strong, because this thing is going to pass without them. Come mid-term elections the likes of Nancy Pelosi, Barny Frank and any number of other panic mongering democrats will be nowhere to be seen in any leadership position for the foreseeable future if no Republicans vote for this abomination.
Source is here (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/RemarksByThePresidentToDepartmentOfEnergyStaff/). (What an odd URL...is the president planning on not addressing the DoE staff again?)
Remarks by the President to Department of Energy Staff
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
__________________________________________________ _______________
For Immediate Release
February 5, 2009
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT TO DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY STAFF
U.S. Department of Energy
Washington, D.C.
12:12 P.M. EST
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you so much. Well, it is a thrill to be here. Thank you, Secretary Chu, for bringing your experience and expertise to this new role. And thanks to all of you who have done so much on behalf of the country each and every day here at the department. You know, your mission is so important, and it's only going to grow as we transform the ways we produce energy and use energy for the sake of our environment, for the sake of our security, and for the sake of our economy.
As we are meeting, in the halls of Congress just down the street from here, there's a debate going on about the plan I've proposed, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan.
This isn't some abstract debate. Last week, we learned that many of America's largest corporations are planning to lay off tens of thousands of workers. Today we learned that last week, the number of new unemployment claims jumped to 626,000. Tomorrow, we're expecting another dismal jobs report on top of the 2.6 million jobs that we lost last year. We've lost half a million jobs each month for the last two months.
Now, I believe that legislation of such magnitude as has been proposed deserves the scrutiny that it has received over the last month. I think that's a good thing. That's the way democracy is supposed to work. But these numbers that we're seeing are sending an unmistakable message -- and so are the American people. The time for talk is over. The time for action is now, because we know that if we do not act, a bad situation will become dramatically worse. Crisis could turn into catastrophe for families and businesses across the country.
And I refuse to let that happen. We can't delay and we can't go back to the same worn-out ideas that led us here in the first place. In the last few days, we've seen proposals arise from some in Congress that you may not have read but you'd be very familiar with because you've been hearing them for the last 10 years, maybe longer. They're rooted in the idea that tax cuts alone can solve all our problems; that government doesn't have a role to play; that half-measures and tinkering are somehow enough; that we can afford to ignore our most fundamental economic challenges -- the crushing cost of health care, the inadequate state of so many of our schools, our dangerous dependence on foreign oil.
So let me be clear: Those ideas have been tested, and they have failed. They've taken us from surpluses to an annual deficit of over a trillion dollars, and they've brought our economy to a halt. And that's precisely what the election we just had was all about. The American people have rendered their judgment. And now is the time to move forward, not back. Now is the time for action.
Just as past generations of Americans have done in trying times, we can and we must turn this moment of challenge into one of opportunity. The plan I've proposed has at its core a simple idea: Let's put Americans to work doing the work that America needs to be done.
This plan will save or create over 3 million jobs -- almost all of them in the private sector.
This plan will put people to work rebuilding our crumbling roads and bridges, our dangerous -- dangerously deficient dams and levees.
This plan will put people to work modernizing our health care system, not only saving us billions of dollars, but countless lives.
This plan will put people to work renovating more than 10,000 schools, giving millions of children the chance to learn in 21st century classrooms, libraries and labs -- and to all the scientists in the room today, you know what that means for America's future.
This plan will provide sensible tax relief for the struggling middle class, unemployment insurance and continuing health care coverage for those who've lost their jobs, and it will help prevent our states and local communities from laying off firefighters and teachers and police.
And finally, this plan will begin to end the tyranny of oil in our time.
After decades of dragging our feet, this plan will finally spark the creation of a clean energy industry that will create hundreds of thousands of jobs over the next few years, manufacturing wind turbines and solar cells, for example -- millions more after that. These jobs and these investments will double our capacity to generate renewable energy over the next few years.
We'll fund a better, smarter electricity grid and train workers to build it -- a grid that will help us ship wind and solar power from one end of this country to another. Think about it. The grid that powers the tools of modern life -- computers, appliances, even BlackBerrys -- (laughter) -- looks largely the same as it did half a century ago. Just these first steps towards modernizing the way we distribute electricity could reduce consumption by 2 to 4 percent.
We'll also lead a revolution in energy efficiency, modernizing more than 75 percent of federal buildings and improving the efficiency of more than 2 million American homes. This will not only create jobs, it will cut the federal energy bill by a third and save taxpayers $2 billion each year and save Americans billions of dollars more on their utility bills.
In fact, as part of this effort, today I've signed a presidential memorandum requesting that the Department of Energy set new efficiency standards for common household appliances. This will save consumers money, this will spur innovation, and this will conserve tremendous amounts of energy. We'll save through these simple steps over the next 30 years the amount of energy produced over a two-year period by all the coal-fired power plants in America.
And through investments in our mass transit system to boost capacity, in our roads to reduce congestion, and in technologies that will accelerate the development of innovations like plug-in hybrid vehicles, we'll be making a significant down payment on a cleaner and more energy independent future.
Now, I read the other day that critics of this plan ridiculed our notion that we should use part of the money to modernize the entire fleet of federal vehicles to take advantage of state of the art fuel efficiency. This is what they call pork. You know the truth. It will not only save the government significant money over time, it will not only create manufacturing jobs for folks who are making these cars, it will set a standard for private industry to match. And so when you hear these attacks deriding something of such obvious importance as this, you have to ask yourself -- are these folks serious? Is it any wonder that we haven't had a real energy policy in this country?
For the last few years, I've talked about these issues with Americans from one end of this country to another. And Washington may not be ready to get serious about energy independence, but I am. And so are you. And so are the American people.
Inaction is not an option that is acceptable to me and it's certainly not acceptable to the American people -- not on energy, not on the economy, not at this critical moment.
So I am calling on all the members of Congress -- Democrats and Republicans, House and Senate -- to rise to this moment. No plan is perfect. There have been constructive changes made to this one over the last several weeks. I would love to see additional improvements today. But the scale and the scope of this plan is the right one. Our approach to energy is the right one. It's what America needs right now, and we need to move forward today. We can't keep on having the same old arguments over and over again that lead us to the exact same spot -- where we are wasting previous energy, we're not creating jobs, we're failing to compete in the global economy, and we end up bickering at a time when the economy urgently needs action.
I thank all of you for being here, and I'm eager to work with Secretary Chu and all of you as we stand up to meet the challenges of this new century. That's what the American people are looking for. That's what I expect out of Congress. That's what I believe we can deliver to our children and our grandchildren in their future.
Thank you so much, everybody. I appreciate it. Thank you. (Applause.)
END 12:21 P.M. EST
IMHO, the president's word choice could be better. He seems to be saying that anyone who doesn't agree with him for what ever reason is simply wrong. As a former member of the U.S. Senate, he would have had first hand knowledge how things get done on the Hill (er, had he not spent so much of his time there campaigning for his next job). Each day, he reminds me more and more of President Carter but without Carter's intelligence or humility.
so on the news this morning the comment is made "stimulus bill bogged down by partisan politics"...
...hows that work when you have all the votes you need on your team?
Somebody is lying.
Democrats know that if they pass this package without Republicans they will take full blame if it fails to help economy. (My opinion it won't do anything of substance).
That said, the "Bully Pulpit" might want to try talking about the 92.4% of people that are employed and still have a paycheck each month.
Focus on the positive! It might result in a change in attitude that is necessary for any recovery.
bandycpa
02-07-2009, 07:38
"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste," Rahm Emanuel, Mr. Obama's new chief of staff, told a Wall Street Journal conference of top corporate chief executives this week.
He elaborated: "Things that we had postponed for too long, that were long-term, are now immediate and must be dealt with. This crisis provides the opportunity for us to do things that you could not do before."
nmap,
Sounds like selfless service to me. Machiavelli would be proud.
I thought the politics of fear had been traded in for "change". Maybe the politics of fear is the change they were talking about.
Bandy
The transcript is here (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/09/us/politics/09text-obama.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all).
As I'm a traditionalist, I was dismayed that he didn't call on Helen Thomas first and that he completely blew off her follow up question.
Relatively speaking, I felt he was better at presenting his broad narrative of the economic crisis and how the stimulus bill can address it than at discussing specific components of the plan. I was hoping he would answer direct questions with direct answers rather than re-phrasing or re-stating points he'd already made.
Thankfully, he backed away slightly from his previous rhetoric in which he castigated broadly all opponents to the stimulus bill.
I doubt anyone really knows the details. Seriously.
HR1 is 647 pages of double spaced text. It is available LINK (http://www.rules.house.gov/111/LegText/111_hr1_text.pdf)
Let us thumb deftly to page 125.
4 (6) $750,000,000 for a program of competitive
5 grants for worker training and placement in high
6 growth and emerging industry sectors: Provided,
7 That $500,000,000 shall be for research, labor ex
8 change and job training projects that prepare work
9 ers for careers in the energy efficiency and renew
10 able energy industries specified in section
11 171(e)(1)(B)(ii) of the WIA (as amended by the
12 Green Jobs Act of 2007): Provided further, That in
13 awarding grants from those funds not designated in
14 the preceding proviso, the Secretary of Labor shall
15 give priority to projects that prepare workers for ca
16 reers in the health care sector: Provided further,
17 That the provisions of section 1103 of this Act shall
18 not apply to this appropriation:
19 Provided, That the additional funds provided to States
20 under this heading are not subject to section 191(a) of
21 the WIA: Provided further, That notwithstanding section
22 1106 of this Act, there shall be no amount set aside from
23 the appropriations made in subsections (1) through (3)
24 under this heading and the amount set aside for sub-
Notice the internal references to the WIA.
The document has lots of these little parts, at least as nearly as I can tell. So we have a big document with interconnections with other big documents.
I suspect that no one could really, truly understand the details. Furthermore, I suspect no one does understand the entire act.
Therein lies a problem, in my opinion.
Dozer523
02-09-2009, 22:06
I doubt anyone really knows the details. Seriously.
HR1 is 647 pages of double spaced text. What a loser! President Bush got $700 Billion with a plan that was just three pages long. And then he completely changed it a week later. 647 pages of things that are actually planned, laid out in a manner that will require they have to get done. And reported on a web site accessable to every computer in the WWW, so that no matter how well some things go, the loyal opposition can ding him for the ones that won't go quite right (it is a statistical certainty). How rediculously inflexible.
Apparantly, Barry never learned the key to Great leadership. "Indecision is the key to flexability.":)
And reported on a web site accessable to every computer in the WWW, so that no matter how well some things go, the loyal opposition can ding him for the ones that won't go quite right (it is a statistical certainty).
A statistical certainty, you say? So, you agree the bill is flawed from inception? :D
Dozer523
02-09-2009, 23:35
A statistical certainty, you say? So, you agree the bill is flawed from inception? :D Misleading vividness, friend.
No, I'm saying that with it is statistically impossible to be right all the time with 647 pages of double spaced text. And, by the same rational, it is also, statistically impossible for the plan to be completely wrong. I opt for action, trusting that "Vigorous execution can save an imperfect plan."
Misleading vividness, friend.
Of course. I was attempting a jest in order to lighten the discussion.
Dozer523
02-10-2009, 07:53
Of course. I was attempting a jest in order to lighten the discussion. :o I KNEW That! I was pretty sure you would get the reference too. You ARE one of the smartest guys here , ya know. (even if you sit in a dark room watching the flickering blue light of a computer, plugged into voice-recongition software Yuck!) KKHH:D
:o I KNEW That! I was pretty sure you would get the reference too.
Get it? Heck, I've used it from time to time. (evil grin).
Thank you for the kind words...Now I have to try to live up to them!
Source is here (http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=303D7F09-18FE-70B2-A82B341DB4F2D36A).
Kroft to Obama: Are you punch-drunk?
By: Craig Gordon
March 22, 2009 06:55 PM EST
President Barack Obama said he believes the global financial system remains at risk of implosion with the failure of Citigroup or AIG, touching off “an even more destructive recession and potentially depression.”
His remarks came in a “60 Minutes” interview in which he was pressed by an incredulous Steve Kroft for laughing and chuckling several times while discussing the perilous state of the world’s economy.
“You're sitting here. And you're— you are laughing. You are laughing about some of these problems. Are people going to look at this and say, ‘I mean, he's sitting there just making jokes about money—’ How do you deal with— I mean: explain. . .” Kroft asks at one point.
“Are you punch-drunk?” Kroft says.
“No, no. There's gotta be a little gallows humor to get you through the day,” Obama says, with a laugh.
The interview is Obama’s most detailed explanation yet of his view of the world economic crisis, and he makes clear that he’s afraid the nation hasn’t seen the worst of it – even invoking the possibility of a “depression” if a series of financial institutions collapse all at once.
He is quick to add that he’s “optimistic about that not happening. Because I think we did learn lessons from the Great Depression.”
But Obama also makes clear in the interview that he believes Wall Street’s high-risk, high-reward culture was a main cause of the economic meltdown. He takes aim at traders and executives in extremely personal terms – calling them ironically at one point “the best and the brightest” – and says that even today, those same executives don’t get just how much their recklessness contributed to a recession that he says deteriorated more quickly than he expected.
“I mean there were a whole bunch of folks who, on paper, if you looked at quarterly reports, were wildly successful, selling derivatives that turned out to be. . .completely worthless,” Obama says, with a chuckle.
“Gosh, I don't think it's me being anti-Wall Street just to point out that the best and the brightest— didn't do too well on that front, and that— you know, maybe the incentive structures that have been set up— have not produced the kinds of long term growth that— that I think everybody's looking for.”
He also said he doesn’t think Wall Street has gotten his message yet, and that he must do a better job conveying it to them:
“One of the things that I have to do is to communicate to Wall Street that, given the current crisis that we're in, they can't expect help from taxpayers but they enjoy all the benefits that they enjoyed before the crisis happened,” Obama said. “You get a sense that, in some institutions that has not sunk in. That you can't go back to the old way of doing business, certainly not on the taxpayers' dime.”
Yet he stops short of endorsing legislation moving through Congress to tax nearly all the bonuses of executives at AIG — and clearly signaled his desire for changes in the legislation.
He says it’s important not to “govern out of anger.” And asked if the measure was constitutional, the former law professor said: “Well, I think that— as a general proposition, you don't want to be passing laws that are just targeting a handful of individuals…And as a general proposition, I think you certainly don't want to use the tax code—is to punish people.”
“So let's see if there are ways of doing this that are both legal, that are constitutional that uphold our basic principles of fairness, but don't hamper us from getting the banking system back on track,” Obama said. “That's why we're going to have to take a look at this legislation carefully.”
And in fact, Obama this week will be turning to some of those very same Wall Street executives for help in bailing out banks and other financial institutions whose “toxic assets” are stopping up the global market for credit. He’s quick to add that he needs to do a better job conveying to them his belief in the market, and desire for it to succeed.
“Part of my job is to communicate to them, "Look, I believe in the market. I believe in financial innovation. And I believe in success." I want them to do well,” Obama said.
He also acknowledges that the recession has grown more serious more quickly than he expected, particularly regarding job losses. But he expresses hope that that quick decline might also make for a quicker-than-expected turnaround.
“There’s a potential silver lining, which may be that things are so accelerated now, the modern economy is so intertwined and wired, that things happen really fast. . . but things may recover faster than they have in the past,” Obama said.
And he defended his embattled Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, telling Kroft that he wouldn’t accept his resignation if he tried to quit. Obama said jokingly that he’d respond: “Sorry Buddy, you've still got the job.”
The economy dominates the interview, which also ranges on topics such as his upcoming Afghanistan policy review and even his daughter’s new swing set at the White House.
On Afghanistan, Obama said he is looking for a “comprehensive strategy” that stresses diplomacy that includes engagement with neighboring Pakistan. While Obama is studying requests from the military for more troops, he warned that, “there's gotta be an exit strategy. There-- there's gotta be a sense that this is not perpetual drift.”
He said Afghanistan is a more complex problem than Iraq. “Iraq was actually easier than Afghanistan. It's easier terrain,” Obama told Kroft. “You've got a-- much better educated population, infrastructure to build off of. You don't have some of the same destabilizing border-- issues that you have between Afghanistan and Pakistan. And so this is going to be a tough nut to crack. But-- it is not acceptable for us to simply sit back and let safe havens of terrorists plan and plot.”
For all the challenges, Obama said, “the complexities of Afghanistan-- are matched, maybe even dwarfed, by the complexities of the economic situation.”
Obama also used the interview to criticize former Vice President Dick Cheney’s criticism of Obama’s decision to close Guantanamo Bay prison, where terror suspects are held. Since leaving office, Cheney has been an outspoken critic of Obama over the war on terror, saying Obama was taking steps to “raise the risk to the American people of another attack.”
“How many terrorists have actually been brought to justice under the philosophy that is being promoted by Vice President Cheney?” Obama asked. “It hasn't made us safer. What it has been is a great advertisement for anti-American sentiment.”
I'm hoping that soon the president will enter the phase of his administration where he's exceeding my admittedly skeptical expectations rather than saying things that requires yet more management of those hopes.
ZooKeeper
03-22-2009, 20:41
He has had an attitude of "my way or the highway" since elected.
It shows in almost every speech he gives by saying the following - by the "American people when they went to the polls in November and voted resoundingly for change"
It's like everyone should just agree with him. You also see this in others attitudes who say we should want him to succeed then jump all over people who say we don't want him to succeed if he has failed policies.
I find it a bit frustrating that the president stumbles when answering questions that appear to be pre-arranged. No, wait. Sorry. He's back on track and being evasive.:munchin
ETA: It is instructive that many reporters have stopped taking notes. I think they're realizing what others suspected (knew) from day one.
Source is here (http://www.breitbart.com/print.php?id=D974P3SG0&show_article=1).
Analysis: Teleprompter telegraphs Obama caution
Mar 24 10:07 PM US/Eastern
By RON FOURNIER
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - What kind of politician brings a teleprompter to a news conference?
A careful one.
President Barack Obama took no chances in his second prime-time news conference, reading a prepared statement in which he took both sides of the AIG bonus brouhaha and asked an anxious nation for its patience.
"There are no quick fixes," he said, "and there are no silver bullets."
It's an interesting dichotomy: Obama came before the nation to sell one of the most expensive and politically risky agendas ever offered by a U.S. president, but his language was heavy with caution. A hard-willed plan given a soft sell.
Served up opportunities to lead with his heart, Obama was cerebral. Cool and calming in a time of white-hot public anger.
"You know, there was a lot of outrage and finger-pointing last week, and much of it is understandable," Obama said of the bonus issue in his opening remarks. "I'm as angry as anybody about those bonuses that went to some of the very same individuals who brought our financial system to its knees."
"Bankers and executives on Wall Street need to realize that enriching themselves on the taxpayers' dime is inexcusable, that the days of outsized rewards and reckless speculation that puts us all at risk have to be over," the president told reporters and the nation.
But he didn't look angry. Nor did he sound much like a pitchfork-wielding populist.
"At the same time, the rest of us can't afford to demonize every investor or entrepreneur who seeks to make a profit. That drive is what has always fueled our prosperity, and it is what will ultimately get these banks lending and our economy moving once more," he said.
It was a carefully modulated statement, and Obama—relying on a familiar crutch—read it off a flat-screen monitor perched at the back of the East Room.
The teleprompter was no help during the question-and-answer session (reporters don't signal their intentions), but Obama was no less careful during that give and take.
Asked why people should trust government with the regulatory authority to take over failing financial companies such as troubled insurer American International Group Inc., Obama passed on the chance to demonize Washington.
"Keep in mind, it is precisely because of the lack of this authority that the AIG situation has gotten worse," Obama said. He then gave a scholarly explanation of how the proposal would work.
Pressed again, Obama cited the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation's handling of the IndyMac Bank as an example of government properly using its authority.
The government did something right? That's news to most Americans.
Still, it's hard to criticize Obama's communication skills or tactics. Polls show that while the public has turned against Washington and Wall Street, the president's ratings remain steady.
He has aggressively delivered his cautious message—through town halls, talk shows, travel and, yes, prime-time news conferences. His message: Stick with me and my $3.6 trillion budget.
"This is a big ocean liner, it's not a speedboat. It doesn't turn around immediately," he said Tuesday night. "But we're in a better, better place because of the decisions that we made."
Calm. Cool. Careful.
One of the few times he summoned raw emotion came after a reporter demanded to know why it took him so long to express outrage over the AIG executive bonuses.
"It took a couple of days because I like to know what I'm talking about before I speak."
Even better, he likes to have it up on the teleprompter.
In other words, the show has good ratings so the lack of intellectual content is not a problem. Mr. President, you are the next American Idol.*
________________________
* My apologies to Ms. Abdul: loved your cameo in Family Guy.
Source is here (http://www.thrfeed.com/2009/03/obam-press-conference-ratings.html#more).
Early ratings: Obama's viewership declines
Most TV shows start strong in the ratings, then decline as their novelty wears off. Apparently that trend also holds true for the president's primetime telecasts.
According to the early Nielsen ratings, Barack Obama's Tuesday night press conference showed some audience slippage compared with his two most recent live events.
The news special drew a 21.1 metered market household rating across the four major broadcasters -- down 14% from from his Feb. 24 address and Feb. 12 conference (which drew a 24.5 and 24.4 in the metered markets).
Obama's ratings could shift later today when Nielsen releases the telecast's national viewership (which will include the cable news networks). This post will be updated when the new data is released.
On the plus side, some broadcasters who were grumpy about the president's primetime interruption nonetheless enjoyed a silver lining last night. With Obama clearing the night of Fox's "American Idol" (which will air a performance show tonight and its results show on Thursday), several of the singing competition's rivals enjoyed significant ratings gains over last week.
These number could shift slightly more than usual in the nationals, but the preliminaries have ABC's "Dancing With the Stars" results show up a big 32% (15.7 million viewers, 3.7 preliminary adults 18-49 rating and 10 share). NBC's "The Biggest Loser" (9.8 million, 4.1/11) hit an eight-week high. CBS' "NCIS" (17.5 million, 3.9/10) was very strong also. At 10 p.m., ABC's "Primetime" (8.5 million, 2.7/7) was up, while CBS' "The Mentalist" (17.5 million, 3.8/10) climbed 15%.
Obama's press conference providing some of these shows with a sturdy lead-in may have helped too. Typically "The Biggest Loser" and "NCIS" have to self start at 8 p.m., while last week ABC had a low-rated recap episode to warm up the 9 p.m. "Dancing" audience.
As for the protest vote, the CW's "Reaper" (2.5 million, 1.0/3) at 8 p.m. was the only broadcast show to air against Obama's press conference and climbed 11% to hit a season high.
In the conference, Obama said he was seeing signs of progress in his drive to lead the United States out of economic crisis as he sought to reassure recession-weary Americans he was on the right track.
"We're moving in the right direction," Obama said.
Knocked off stride by public anger over hefty corporate bonuses and facing skepticism about his massive budget plan, the president moved to regain his political footing and refocus attention on his broader economic agenda. He made his case to the American people the same day he pressed for coordinated action among the world's major economies, and just a day after unveiling a trillion-dollar plan to soak up toxic bank assets at the root of the global financial meltdown.
Obama took the podium after U.S. stocks slid while investors paused to reassess the government's latest effort to clean up bank balance sheets. Initial euphoria over the plan had driven stocks sharply higher on Monday.
Obama, who has vowed to repair America's image overseas after eight years under George W. Bush, said there were indications his policy changes were "restoring confidence" internationally in U.S. global leadership.
He also made clear he was serious about his recent overtures of a fresh start with longtime U.S. foe Iran and said the status quo of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, in which he has promised strong U.S. engagement, was "unsustainable."
Focusing on the economy, Obama said, "We've put in place a comprehensive strategy designed to attack this crisis on all fronts. It's a strategy to create jobs, to help responsible homeowners, to restart lending, and to grow our economy over the long term. And we are beginning to see signs of progress."
-- With additional reporting by Matt Spetalnick and Ross Colvin, Reuters
Last night, the president effectively bit two of the hands that helped him get his current job. First, he pre-empted a hour of prime time during sweeps. Second, he blew off print news outlets in selecting the questions he would (not) answer.
I think one looks less than presidential if one has to ask if someone is in attendance. Such a question reflects a lack of coordination between the president and the White House press office, a deficiency of situational awareness--he had no idea where people were sitting, and a certain lack of respect "Oh, I didn't see you when I walked in the room because I was thinking about what I was going to say after you stopped talking." But, yeah, he's a man of the people all right.
In addition to his tactic of passing the blame by talking of problems he "inherited" (his use of that particular word speaks volumes of his misplaced sense of entitlement), the president is making more and more use of the phrases "I'm not the only one who says this" and "I'm not the only one who thinks this". The issue I have with this emerging practice is that he sought the office on the premise that his ideas were smarter, better, and different than those of others. Now, that he has the job, he seeks the relative safety of numbers by saying "Me too."
Coupled with his numerous asides about the "mistakes" he's going to make along the way, it seems clear to me that the president is having difficulties finding his stride as a leader. I'd have more confidence in the president if the man were to demonstrate his ability to walk the talk before he took off at the pace he's not yet ready to keep. Last night, he demonstrated that he's not ready for prime time (members of his own staff tuned him out (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sJa0qVLStA)) yet he is already trying to shape his historical legacy.
According to the early Nielsen ratings, Barack Obama's Tuesday night press conference showed some audience slippage compared with his two most recent live events.
They caught me. Since I wasn't home for St. Patrick's Day, I watched The Quiet Man (which I usually watch on St. Patrick's Day) and drank two Guinness stouts. Did I miss anything? :rolleyes: Gosh, I hope MoveOn.Org doesn't find out...I'd hate to have the neighbors angry at me for having all those picketers blocking the street. ;)
Richard's $.02 :munchin
Source is here (http://www.thrfeed.com/2009/04/obama-press-conference-draws-288-million-viewers.html).
Obama's ratings slide: press conference down 29%
Obama44 Audience interest in Barack Obama’s news conferences seems to be falling, with Wednesday’s press event drawing the president’s smallest primetime audience since his inauguration.
The telecast to mark Obama’s 100th day in office was viewed by 28.8 million people, according to Nielsen. That's a 29% drop from the president's last press conference, on March 24, and a 42% fall since his first, on Feb. 9.
Ten networks carried the telecast, which is one less than last time since Fox elected to run its detective drama Lie to Me (7.8 million, 2.3 national adults 18-49 rating) instead. Airing its regular entertainment programming saved Fox ad dollars but didn’t help the show much. Lie pulled the same rating it did last week. Yet, like last week, it won the 8 p.m. hour.
Here's the president's last three primetime news events:
Feb: 9: 49.5 million
March 24: 40.4 million
April 29: 28.8 million
If he envisions these press conferences as the modern day fireside chat, someone should tell him that one is supposed to burn logs, not saw them.
The president talks about reviving the American economy being an exercise in intelligence and yet he schedules consecutive press conferences during network sweeps.
frostfire
05-17-2009, 13:53
America being a money pit to various countries is nothing new I'm sure, but really?!?!
http://appropriations.house.gov/pdf/PressSummary05-07-09.pdf
Department of State and USAID, International Affairs and Stabilization Activities: $10 billion
Assistance and Operations in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq
•Afghanistan: $1.52 billion, $86 million above the request, including: $980 million to fund economic development and agriculture programs, strengthen national and provincial governance, and expand the rule of law; and $536 million, $86 million above the request, for diplomatic operations including additional civilian staff and diplomatic security.
•* Pakistan: $1.9 billion, $591 million above the request, including: $597 million, $100 million above the request, to help address the economic crisis including agriculture and food security, assist the displaced population, strengthen national and provincial governance, expand the rule of law, and improve access to and quality of education; $46 million for diplomatic operations including additional civilian staff and diplomatic security; $897 million, $91 million above the request, for a new secure embassy and consulates in Pakistan; and $400 million for the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capability Fund, available September 30th 2009, to build the counterinsurgency capabilities of the Pakistani security forces.
•Iraq: $968 million, $336 million above the request, including: $482 million to continue stabilization programs, and strengthen governance and rule of law; and $486 million, $336 million above the request, for diplomatic operations.
•Oversight: $20 million, $13 million above the request, to expand oversight capacity of the State Department, USAID, and the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan to review programs in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq.
Performance Assessment for the Governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan
Because the stability and security of the region is tied more to the capacity and conduct of the Afghan and Pakistani governments and to the resolve of both societies than it is to the policies of the United States, the President shall submit a report to Congress, not later than the date of submission of the fiscal year 2011 budget request, assessing whether the Governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan are, or are not, demonstrating the necessary commitment, capability, conduct and unity of purpose to warrant the continuation of the President’s policy announced on March 27, 2009. This report must include five concrete standards of performance:
1.The level of political consensus and unity of purpose to confront the political and security challenges facing the region;
2.The level of government corruption and actions taken to eliminate it;
3.The performance of security forces with respect to counterinsurgency operations;
4.The performance of intelligence agencies in cooperating fully with the U.S. and not undermining the security of our troops and our objectives in the region; and
5.The ability of the government to control the territory within their borders.
Other Efforts in the Middle East
•West Bank and Gaza: $665 million in bilateral economic, humanitarian, and security assistance for the West Bank and Gaza.
•Jordan: $250 million, $250 million above the request, including $100 million for economic and $150 million for security assistance.
•Egypt: $360 million, $310 million above the request, including $50 million for economic assistance, $50 million for border security, and $260 million for security assistance.
•Israel: $555 million of the $2.8 billion 2010 request for security assistance, $555 million above the supplemental request.
•Lebanon: $74 million, $24 million below the request, for security assistance.
Humanitarian Assistance
•International Food Assistance: $500 million, $200 million above the request, for PL 480 international food assistance to alleviate suffering during the global economic crisis.
•Refugee Assistance: $343 million, $50 million above the request, to help displaced people around the world with food, water, shelter and other basic needs, including humanitarian assistance for Gaza. Funding for the UN Relief and Works Agency programs in the West Bank and Gaza is limited to $119 million.
•Disaster Assistance: $200 million to avert famines and provide life-saving assistance during natural disasters and for internally displaced people around the world, including Somalia, Zimbabwe, Ethiopia, the Middle East and South Asia.
Peacekeeping: $837 million for United Nations peacekeeping operations, including an expanded mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and a new mission in Chad and the Central African Republic.
HIV/AIDS: $100 million, $100 million above the request, for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria to address a funding shortfall for grants in key countries such as Haiti, The Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Afghanistan.
Other International Assistance
•Africa: $151 million, $18 million above the request, for economic and security assistance for Kenya, Somalia, Southern Sudan, and Zimbabwe.
•Mexico: $470 million, $404 million above the request, to address growing violence along the United States-Mexico border by supporting the Government of Mexico’s war against organized crime and drug-trafficking.
•Georgia: $242 million to fulfill the United States commitment to the people of Georgia.
•Global Financial Crisis: $300 million, $148 million below the request, to address the global financial crisis in developing countries.