Obama’s Toxic Press Conference (Part One)
One noticeable feature of President Obama’s March 24, 2009 press conference is that he likes the word ‘ host.’ According to the transcript he used it seven times during the press event but it seemed like many more than that. For a scripted press conference one could expect this distraction would have been removed from the program. It makes even more sense now why The Messiah prefers campaign mode and teleprompters. Had to get that out of the way first.
The second issue is the scripting of his performances. Yes, they are more like Hollywood performances reminiscent of the 2008 Presidential campaign and the use of Greek columns for backdrops and concert type venues for The One. At least in press briefings or conferences more typical of Washington it is known that who the speaker calls on for questions has been determined in advance with perhaps an occasional ad hoc invitation for a question or two. But calling on reporters like kids in an elementary school classroom is another unwelcome departure from past practice. Now the second item is out of the way. On to the meat of the subject.
The first reporter tried to ask a pointed question. That is, if using different words, the question could have been are you really a socialist Mr President and will you nationalize much of the private sector using the recession as an excuse? But instead she asked if the public should support or reject Geithner and Bernanke’s errand boy trip to the Hill asking for just such an action. Obama replied that not having the power to take over the private sector is exactly why the bailout mess happened. Gee Mr President, have you ever considered that not acting correctly on mergers and acquisitions that can stifle competition could have avoided the opportunity to call some companies too big to fail? Gee Mr President, is the Justice Department charged with the responsibility of oversight in this regard? Perhaps the SEC as well as other agencies and departments are involved also?
If you want to criticize other administrations for dropping the ball on unrestrained mergers and acquisitions that is quite understandable. But looking to nationalize private sector entities in whole or in part using the excuse of current dilemmas as justification is perverse. So is the growing evidence that Mr Obama and crew would be quite satisfied with a socialist regime in the good ol US of A. Go ahead, criticize this post and author for mentioning the ‘S’ word but then have the rebuttal evidence to support your position. Obama continues to promote nationalizing banks, businesses, energy, health care and increasing government control over education. In other words expanding the role of government in everything about private lives. Inidividual freedom and responsibility will be lost in a country founded on such principles if Obama has his way. Even George Will in a piece cited on this blog suggests the Obama answer and Washington DC in general is to fix things by expanding the role of government. While he has rejected the notion of socialism from Obama in the past this is about as close as he may get to saying it.
The next post will pick up on the question of the next reporter chosen by President Obama. Otherwise these posts will get much too large and unruly.
A related item that seems worthy of repeating comes from the 60 Minutes interview when Steve Kroft asked the President if there is a limit to what we can spend? The President replied that we can spend as long as we can borrow the money. The fact that this question and answer were not major headlines throughtout this country rather than the punchdrunk laughter story or the bad joke on Leno is as troubling as Obama’s answer.
If you think we’re in trouble now. Wait until this country’s fine leadership spends us to the point where the governement can no longer borrow money. That will make burying future generations in debt look like a great idea. Trouble is by then it will be a moot point. Think about it.
Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com
Now, they tell us - Pt II: AP really catching on to Obama math! (Michelle Malkin)
March 26th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
A country relying on borrowed money to grow, or even survive is foolish, and will end in destruction. The borrower is a slave to the lender.
March 26th, 2009 at 7:13 pm
I couldnt even listen.it made me ill!
March 26th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
Cheer up kids. After Obama was elected his approval rating was about 83%. Early in the year it slipped to about 68%. Zogby has a poll out indicating it is now around 50/50. And Rasmussen has a poll indicating 35% say yea and 30% say nay. But the important part is the trend shows approval falling and disapproval rising.
The one item that confounds is the number of those approving say he is doing a good job. I don’t see him doing anything.
March 27th, 2009 at 3:12 am
It was boring on one level, but very telling on so many others. I understand he did not have the teleprompter but had another device, wide screen monitor or something??? I didn’t pay much attention.
March 27th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
You might want to consider reading (or scanning) the transcript. But then, I have more posts coming out on this starting today and you can read them.