• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama blames media for 'caricature'

Slyfox696 said:
And the only way Obama could ever try is to go to the place where they make money manipulating what he said?

Surely that strikes you as ridiculous.
Click to expand...

No, I see conservatives on daily show all the time. They arent afraid to be challenged.
 
Zyphlin said:
I'd really like to see Obama come out sometime and simply say "You know, some of the dislike, disagreement, and negative sentiment towards me is because people have a fundamental difference of opinion regarding policy".

I know that'd be CRAZY, but it'd be nice to hear.
Click to expand...

Id rather he stopped doing interviews and just did his job executing the law.
 
jonny5 said:
No, I see conservatives on daily show all the time. They arent afraid to be challenged.
Click to expand...
I see. Can you please provide me with all the times George W. Bush appeared on the Daily Show? How many times did Mitt Romney sit down for an interview with MSNBC after winning the Republican nomination?

Your comparison is off. I see Democrats on Fox News too. But the President is much different than a random Congress person or even a governor. And when you have a cable news network devoted to mis-characterizing the President, they make their money from it, it's hard to trust them to A) Ask fair interview questions and B) Not edit the tape to fit their agenda.
 
Zyphlin said:
I'd really like to see Obama come out sometime and simply say "You know, some of the dislike, disagreement, and negative sentiment towards me is because people have a fundamental difference of opinion regarding policy".

I know that'd be CRAZY, but it'd be nice to hear.
Click to expand...
David Remnick: On and Off the Road with Barack Obama : The New Yorker

“There is a historic connection between some of the arguments that we have politically and the history of race in our country, and sometimes it’s hard to disentangle those issues,” he went on. “You can be somebody who, for very legitimate reasons, worries about the power of the federal government—that it’s distant, that it’s bureaucratic, that it’s not accountable—and as a consequence you think that more power should reside in the hands of state governments. But what’s also true, obviously, is that philosophy is wrapped up in the history of states’ rights in the context of the civil-rights movement and the Civil War and Calhoun. There’s a pretty long history there. And so I think it’s important for progressives not to dismiss out of hand arguments against my Presidency or the Democratic Party or Bill Clinton or anybody just because there’s some overlap between those criticisms and the criticisms that traditionally were directed against those who were trying to bring about greater equality for African-Americans.
Click to expand...
 
Slyfox696 said:
And when you have a cable news network devoted to mis-characterizing the President, they make their money from it, it's hard to trust them to A) Ask fair interview questions and B) Not edit the tape to fit their agenda.
Click to expand...

Does that work the other way, or are you just a democrat?
 
scatt said:
Does that work the other way, or are you just a democrat?
Click to expand...
Don't e silly. ABC, NBC, CBS, and CNN are all unbiased and objective news organizations with unbiased and objective reporters, anchors and editors. They never mischaracterize, have no agenda and always ask fair unbiased questions. Only FOX news is bad. Everyone knows that.
 
jonny5 said:
It has nothing to do with his policies or personality, but rather his inability to convince you that conservatives are wrong. And so he cant get anything done because people wont allow Republicans in congress to go along with his policies. Because he hasnt been able to prove Rush or Fox wrong.

Does that sound rational to you? Heck, does it sound professional? Isnt it possible that either Obama is simply wrong, or that people dont beleive him?

He claims to be interested in solving problems, but rarely talks to congress or even his own appointees. He claims to be practical, but thinks govt micromanaging everyone is going to work? He thinks a lot of the things hes put into play worked better than people think. Ok, Ill give him that. Expectations are pretty low, so the fact that there was a Obamacare website at all is probably better than expected. I seem to recall Obama joking about shovel ready not being so shovel ready after all. GUess thats his idea of working better than expected?

As Ive said many times before, if Obama would simply get to work, instead of giving interviews, campaigning, and blaming everyone but himself for the poor performance of govt, maybe something would get done. He works a half a mile from Congress. Walk down the street and say hi.
Click to expand...

I compare this to Chris Christie and his minions blaming bridge-gate on MSNBC. It's politicians trying to convince you to pay no attention to the man behind the curtain - look a shiny box!
 
Fletch said:
Don't e silly. ABC, NBC, CBS, and CNN are all unbiased and objective news organizations with unbiased and objective reporters, anchors and editors. They never mischaracterize, have no agenda and always ask fair unbiased questions. Only FOX news is bad. Everyone knows that.
Click to expand...

The funny thing is that there are posters on this board who will tell you the exact opposite in all seriousness.
 
AlbqOwl said:
Yes, he has said that. And the implication was there again in the New Yorker interview excerpted in the OP. This President, to the best of my knowledge, has never accepted responsibility for anything in his administration that has failed or was not completed as promised. Nothing is ever his fault or doing. It is always somebody else's fault.
Click to expand...

Does seem to be a pattern. Am thinking a little humility/concession would benefit him (Obama).

Dunno. Maybe he will surprise us at the SOTU speech....
 
Fletch said:
Don't e silly. ABC, NBC, CBS, and CNN are all unbiased and objective news organizations with unbiased and objective reporters, anchors and editors. They never mischaracterize, have no agenda and always ask fair unbiased questions. Only FOX news is bad. Everyone knows that.
Click to expand...

Now everybody knows that after Obama told them to think that.
 
pragmatic said:
Does seem to be a pattern. Am thinking a little humility/concession would benefit him (Obama).

Dunno. Maybe he will surprise us at the SOTU speech....
Click to expand...

I am willing to bet he will blame his enemies for what has happened in the past year, even though a President shouldn't have any enemies, politically that is.
 
AlbqOwl said:
Yes, he has said that. And the implication was there again in the New Yorker interview excerpted in the OP. This President, to the best of my knowledge, has never accepted responsibility for anything in his administration that has failed or was not completed as promised. Nothing is ever his fault or doing. It is always somebody else's fault.
Click to expand...

And you'd be wrong. Shockingly enough.

Yakima Herald Republic | Obama accepts

Obama underscored the administration’s unhappiness with the problems so far: “There’s no excuse for it,” he said during a Boston speech to promote his signature domestic policy achievement. “And I take full responsibility for making sure it gets fixed ASAP.”
Click to expand...

Obama: I bear ‘full responsibility for everything’ – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

"I think that, you know, as president I bear responsibility for everything, to some degree," he said on CBS' "60 Minutes."
Click to expand...

President Obama Accepts Responsibility For Libya Attack In Bullish Debate Performance

“Secretary Clinton has done an extraordinary job but she works for me,” he said. “I’m the president and I’m always responsible.
...
“I am ultimately responsible, these are my folks, I’m the one who has to greet the coffins when they come home,” he said.
Click to expand...

Obama Accepts Blame for AIG Bonuses - WSJ.com

"Washington is all in a tizzy and everybody is pointing fingers at each other and saying it's their fault, the Democrats' fault, the Republicans' fault," he said at a town hall meeting Wednesday. "Listen, I'll take responsibility. I'm the President."
Click to expand...

It's like you guys live in a fantasy land where these quotes aren't readily accessible on Google.
 
Slyfox696 said:
I see. Can you please provide me with all the times George W. Bush appeared on the Daily Show? How many times did Mitt Romney sit down for an interview with MSNBC after winning the Republican nomination?

Your comparison is off. I see Democrats on Fox News too. But the President is much different than a random Congress person or even a governor. And when you have a cable news network devoted to mis-characterizing the President, they make their money from it, it's hard to trust them to A) Ask fair interview questions and B) Not edit the tape to fit their agenda.
Click to expand...

Romney isnt President or complaining about the media caricature of him. I dont remember Bush publicly complaining either. Just the opposite, everyone has praised Bush for his professionalism in light of the constant attacks on him since Obama took office. If Obama would just shut up, we wouldnt have to call him out on what he says.
 
Last edited:
My thoughts on this issue:

Holding the media responsible for public perceptions is a convenient rationale for political leaders from both parties to explain why they have not met goals, among other things. However, almost always it is only a small part of the story. Instead, one needs to look at the interpersonal dealings: how the political leaders and their rivals interacted, the degree to which they focused on ideological goals at the expense of common ground, etc.

It is early to write any kind of historical narrative on the Obama Administration, but the early contours are emerging:

1. Fiscal stimulus: He devoted a lot of energy to get this legislation passed. The nation was facing what amounted to an economic emergency so to speak. Maintaining TARP (a last act of leadership by the Bush Administration) and adopting a stimulus program were key aspects of what amounted to an economic stabilization and turnaround strategy. The stimulus, though, was viewed through an ideological lens outside the economics profession, which mainly regards it positively though having fallen short of what was required given the post-stimulus data that emerged. The recession was deeper than had been known at the time. From a political standpoint, political capital was expended due to the ideological gap. Historians probably will judge him as demonstrating leadership on this issue.

2. Affordable Care Act (ACA): Health care reform is viewed through an ideological prism. That access was lacking (as shown in the high incidence of uninsured persons), medical costs were rising persistently faster than inflation (complex reasons e.g., early deployment of technology when cost efficiencies are poor), and outcomes on key benchmarks (also complex) were lower than numerous developed countries (so-called "peers") indicated a need for reform. How to reform the nation's health system saw the two parties as far apart as one could possibly get. Aside from small aspects of the ACA e.g., creating an access mechanism for people with preexisting conditions, there was almost no common ground between the two parties. The ACA was a legacy goal for President Obama and he succeeded in having it enacted, it survived constitutional review, and it was a focus of a disastrous shutdown strategy launched by Senator Ted Cruz et al. Its rollout was also very bumpy. Following on the heels of #1, the ACA hardened the ideological divide and it was probably too much for the GOP to bear, limiting opportunities for future pragmatic collaboration. Historians will likely judge him as demonstrating leadership on this matter, but making a fateful choice that could only dramatically impair his ability to work with GOP going forward. Choices have consequences.

3. The rise of the Tea Party movement further hardened the ideological divide. That the Tea Party movement's momentum has stalled and its influence is slowly decaying is not going to lead to a dramatically different opportunity for collaboration following the 2014 elections. There might be some modest changes, mainly in avoiding the near self-inflicted debt ceiling crises and unnecessary government shutdown that dominated the most recent years, but not much more.

4. Fiscal differences: Both sides essentially "blamed" the other for the failure to reach a grand budget accord. The reality is that acknowledging sincere differences precluded a deal at the time would have preserved latitude for future efforts at collaboration, particularly if events narrowed some of the areas of difference. One can expect blame from certain members of Congress who are in almost continual campaign mode. The President could and should have been more diplomatic. He wasn't. His blunt public comments amplified the perceptions stemming from the ideological divide.

5. The President anecdotally has spent less time nurturing and sustaining relationships with key Congressional leaders than some of his predecessors have. President Reagan and Speaker O'Neill, for example, spent a lot of time talking. So did President Clinton and Speaker Gingrich starting during the government shutdowns. Reagan and O'Neill built a personal relationship that transcended their deep political differences. Clinton and Gingrich built a working relationship after those shutdowns that allowed them to get things done for most of the rest of President Clinton's second term. One cannot same the same for President Obama. IMO, he could and should have had a much better relationship with many of the GOP leaders, excepting the Tea Party members who are much more wed on ideology than practical problem solving. He didn't. Hence, those Congressional leaders had less incentive to be pragmatic and accommodating than might otherwise have been the case.

In sum, the President had to deal with a structural environment that was trending more and more ideological, in large part due to factors beyond his control. That limited some of his opportunities. He also made choices that built the policy road ahead: fiscal stimulus (necessary, IMO, and not a "deal breaker") and the ACA (a key goal, but not necessary in the same sense the stimulus was, but a legacy goal that he was determined to realize). He also did not make the kind of effort needed to build strong personal relationships with Congressional leaders (Democratic and Republican), and this further limited his opportunities.

In short, I believe he could have done more with the proverbial cards that were dealt. Some of the reduced results are on account of factors beyond his control, but others are on account of factors that were controllable, but were shaped by personal choices and actions e.g., lack of time building personal relationships. Personal relationships are no guarantee of governing success, but they do make things a little easier and, even when sincere differences exist, can avoid the creation of damaging perceptions that amplify those very real differences. Indeed, better relationships with the Congressional leaders might have led to their tamping down the politically-motivated efforts expended on such matters as the Benghazi terrorist attack, etc., that have further poisoned the GOP-Obama relationship.
 
:bravo:

Well done Don! I see you've already wrapped up post of the year in January.
 
Kobie said:
And you'd be wrong. Shockingly enough.

Yakima Herald Republic | Obama accepts



Obama: I bear ‘full responsibility for everything’ – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs



President Obama Accepts Responsibility For Libya Attack In Bullish Debate Performance



Obama Accepts Blame for AIG Bonuses - WSJ.com



It's like you guys live in a fantasy land where these quotes aren't readily accessible on Google.
Click to expand...

Yep. And that same Google takes us right to the quotations and video clips, complete with their sources in full context--context is everything--when Obama has been challenged on ALL those issues. And invariably, without exception, he has not taken personal responsibility for a single one of them. It is always "That is above my pay grade" or "I wasn't in that loop" or "I was not informed about that" or "I found out about that the same way you did, in the newspapers" along with blaming the media, this personality, that entity, and always the Republicans blocking what he intended to do or blowing out of proportion with 'phony scandals' etc. Sure he will expound on the fact that he is 'ultimately responsible' along with his inevitable promise to 'get to the bottom of that' etc.

But he never does, does he? No order to the Justice Dept to appoint special prosecutors. No updates at subsequent press conferences to report on the progress being made to 'get to the bottom of it'. Nobody is brought to justice. No heads roll. Nobody is even criticized. He makes these grandiose statements and then it right back to business as usual. Once it is off the front page, it is pretty obvious he doesn't concern himself with it at all.

From your link:
Going head to head with Mitt Romney in New York, Obama took a far more aggressive tone than in the first debate, which he was widely seen to have lost by being too passive and failing to engage with his challenger.

“Secretary Clinton has done an extraordinary job but she works for me,” he said. “I’m the president and I’m always responsible.

“The suggestion that anyone in my team, the secretary of state, our UN ambassador, anybody on my team, would play politics or mislead when we have lost four of our own is offensive.

“That’s not what we do,” Obama said, turning to face Romney. “That’s not what I do as president, that’s not what I do as commander in chief.”
Click to expand...

And from Forbes:
The Obama Administration received requests for additional security from the Embassy and the Ambassador himself as early as February. An embassy cable on June 25 expressed fear of rising Islamic extremism in eastern Libya around Benghazi, and noted that the black flag of Al-Qaeda “has been spotted several times flying over government buildings and training facilities.” On August 2, Ambassador Stevens sent a cable requesting 11 additional body guards, noting “Host nation security support is lacking and cannot be depended on to provide a safe and secure environment for the diplomatic mission of outreach,”

But these requests for additional security were repeatedly denied, as security officials testified before Chairman Darrell Issa’s House Oversight Committee earlier this month

http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterfe...ons-amount-to-a-shameful-dereliction-of-duty/
Click to expand...

Nope. They sent Susan Rice out the very next Sunday to all the morning programs to say that the Benghazi attack was a spontaneous uprising in protest of an insulting video.

You won't find a quotation ever from Obama admitting that. Nary even a hint of "We screwed up." "We did that poorly." "They got that wrong." "I apologize that we did that" or any such thing. You will never hear him stand up and say that he was wrong to have done that as President or that anything was his fault. Ever.
 
Last edited:
AlbqOwl said:
You won't find a quotation ever from Obama admitting that. Nary even a hint of "We screwed up." "We did that poorly." "They got that wrong." "I apologize that we did that" or any such thing. You will never hear him stand up and say that he was wrong to have done that as President or that anything was his fault. Ever.
Click to expand...

Deadline day for Obamacare?s first customers - Obama: We screwed up health law rollout - Finding Obamacare enrollees on the dance floor - POLITICO Pulse - POLITICO.com

President Barack Obama cited the rollout of the federal Obamacare website when asked about his biggest mistake of the year. “We screwed it up,” he said. “There’s no doubt that when it came to the health care rollout — even though I was meeting every other week or every three week with folks and emphasizing how important it was that consumers have a good experience, an easy experience…. the fact is it didn’t happen in the first month, in the first six weeks that was at all acceptable,” he said at his press conference.
Click to expand...

Are you going to triple-down on being wrong, or just admit you were wrong?
 
Here's another one:

Obama: 'I screwed up' on Daschle appointment - CNN.com

Daschle, the former Democratic leader in the U.S. Senate, withdrew earlier Tuesday as news that he failed to pay some taxes in the past continued to stir opposition on Capitol Hill.

"I think I screwed up," Obama said in a wide-ranging interview with CNN's Anderson Cooper.

"And I take responsibility for it and we're going to make sure we fix it so it doesn't happen again."
Click to expand...
 
SOTU is actually one of the reasons he has his caricature. Its simply another campaign speech (and that goes for any president) where he talks like hes lecturing and makes bunch of promises which never happen. If he wants to be seen as being interested in solving problems, practical, and things working better, then he needs to actually act like it, not just talk. As I said above, that means shutting up with the rhetoric and blame. That means only doing things that have some support of Republicans (even it thats nothing). Being practical means understanding that at least 45% of the country DOES NOT agree with his philosophy. And so hes not going to get his way.
 
jonny5 said:
It has nothing to do with his policies or personality, but rather his inability to convince you that conservatives are wrong. And so he cant get anything done because people wont allow Republicans in congress to go along with his policies. Because he hasnt been able to prove Rush or Fox wrong.

Does that sound rational to you? Heck, does it sound professional? Isnt it possible that either Obama is simply wrong, or that people dont beleive him?

He claims to be interested in solving problems, but rarely talks to congress or even his own appointees. He claims to be practical, but thinks govt micromanaging everyone is going to work? He thinks a lot of the things hes put into play worked better than people think. Ok, Ill give him that. Expectations are pretty low, so the fact that there was a Obamacare website at all is probably better than expected. I seem to recall Obama joking about shovel ready not being so shovel ready after all. GUess thats his idea of working better than expected?

As Ive said many times before, if Obama would simply get to work, instead of giving interviews, campaigning, and blaming everyone but himself for the poor performance of govt, maybe something would get done. He works a half a mile from Congress. Walk down the street and say hi.
Click to expand...

One does have to consider the fact that practitioners of persuasion science can bypass reason straight to one's emotions. This makes it difficult to discuss ANY issue from ANY side of the aisle. Pollutes our entire discourse.

Obama ****s up when he decries the other side's use of techniques his side uses just as cavalierly.
 
I've noticed over the past few years the idea that one accepts responsibility for an error carries no actual consequences at all. Pretty cool, huh? So Hillary is completely responsible for Benghazi, Obama for the ACA, and whoever for the IRS, Holder for Fast and Furious, and all the main players in all the transgressions are actually better off now than when their supposed responsibility bore down on them. Hilarious.
 
Kobie said:
Deadline day for Obamacare?s first customers - Obama: We screwed up health law rollout - Finding Obamacare enrollees on the dance floor - POLITICO Pulse - POLITICO.com

Are you going to triple-down on being wrong, or just admit you were wrong?
Click to expand...

Yes that line was in his press conference that day, including the line implying that he was personally on top of it--translation: it isn't my fault--followed in the next paragraph or two with him blaming the IT contractors and not the fact that it was he and/or his cabinet secretary who hired them. He has never put the responsibility on Kathleen Sebelius where it squarely belonged or ever admitted to anybody that the concept itself is flawed in any way. And since that time he has blamed the media, the GOP, the medical providers, and the insurance companies for the problems that have resulted. Nary a finger pointed at himself personally.
 
scatt said:
Does that work the other way, or are you just a democrat?
Click to expand...
It works both ways. I wouldn't expect the next Republican President to go on MSNBC, if MSNBC shows as little class in reporting the truth as Fox News has.

Why would I make a hypocrite out of myself?
jonny5 said:
Romney isnt President or complaining about the media caricature of him. I dont remember Bush publicly complaining either.
Click to expand...

A) Republicans have been whining about "liberal media" for decades.

B) There wasn't a Democrat run news station at the time who has sunk to the levels Fox News has.

C) Don't think your attempt to shift the argument away from where you were wrong went unnoticed.

If Obama would just shut up, we wouldnt have to call him out on what he says.
Click to expand...
If Republican media wouldn't lie all the time and miscast him as someone he's not, Obama wouldn't have to say anything about the media. It works both ways.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom