Poor Newsweek. Howard Fineman knows the reality of the world. He sees it. He lists it in this article (or at least starts to), and one can easily see that he wants to lower the expectations for Barack Obama. He just can’t. He just can’t dust off the confetti yet.
I understand why Barack Obama was lingering over the shave ice in Hawaii. Once he hits the ground here in Washington, his famous aloha spirit is going to be tested even before he is inaugurated.
Yes, that’s right. In the first half of this sentence Fineman excuses Barack Obama for suddenly going quiet on all the challenges facing the next President. Then, in the second half of the sentence Fineman recognizes and admits that Obama is going to be challenged before even getting Inaugurated. Problem here is…that time is NOW. Barack Obama is being challenged NOW. Some can hide or excuse or apologize for him by saying, “He’s not officially President yet,” but that’s like allowing a drunk driver to get off on a technicality. Obama railed constantly, all day/every day about every single problem that the next President would face, AND about how he would solve them. As a Presidential candidate, the man was on at least one cable news show every hour of every day for two years. Now, as a President-elect, with the power to actually start taking action (even if the action is in support and/or agreement with President Bush), the guy’s silent. Oh yeah, we got CHANGE alright. A change from constant whining, promising, complaining, suggesting, proposing, and so forth…to silence, inaction, leadership that’s left his party in disarray, fractured, and confused. A man with such great leadership that even his party base-the people who voted for him, sweat for him, gave all their money…those are the people who are actually LOUDER than Republicans?!
Oh Howard, have no fear. Expectations of Obama’s greatness are already dissolving. What’s interesting is that the decline in expectations is coming from the left, from his supporters, from his party, and now from his media (TIME, Newsweek, MSNBC, NYT, even Al Jazeera). Meanwhile, those who have the least expectations of Obama’s Administration, are enjoying popcorn.
Author of “Reparations and America’s 2nd Civil War
Reparations and America’s 2nd Civil War: Malensek, Scott: 9798864028674: Amazon.com: Books
Obama is over his head and drowning fast! His idea-free campaign promised ‘change’ without any specifics and now the boy wonder must deliver, what?
Poor Obama, It would have easier to keep collecting money from ol’ Tony Rezko and retire rich than have to actually take responsibility.
How does that analogy work???
When you say, ‘the time is NOW’, that doesn’t make ‘the time now’– even if you want it to be.
Wishing for the time to be now doesn’t make it so.
Even if you make the case that pragmatically ‘the time is now,’ it still can’t be. That interpretation requires reality be defined as ‘what works.’ Now if Obama is being ‘challenged’ NOW, then he needs the tools available to meet those challenges, to fix what is broken. Yet, ‘NOW’ he still hasn’t the tools, no new congress, no legal authority (he hasn’t take the oath of office) and there is still a sitting president.
Those aren’t technicalities, there are legalities, and ‘tools’ required in office to do ‘what works’.
The time is only ‘NOW’ for you and your small minority, –you have no case to make for it, except from the subjective point of desirability.
Simply done, by your reasoning, he should have not campaigned at all because he didn’t have the tools for the past 2yrs to get anything done. Democrats in the Senate, House, and his party base are the ones looking to him to speak out, take a position, to lead them. He can do that. He can speak-that’s all they want him to do, and the only tool he needs is his mouth.
… not so, Scott. The last two years he had time on his side, rhetorical skills, personality, plus financial and political support ‘tools.’ They weren’t full blown tools like Hillary’s, but none of the other candidates had a president husband; so while some of his tools were smaller by comparison than hers, they increased over time. It’s ‘what worked’.
You say,
“Democrats in the Senate, House, and his party base are the ones looking to him to speak out, take a position, to lead them.”
Sure, some are, but not with the negative dramatics that you and Mike are shoveling. They are not asking what you and Mike are asking. You are claiming that the “declining expectations are coming from the left” (Mike), and “Dems are blaming Obama for stimulus delay.” You are making mountains out of lesser things. Both of you are nit-picking and exaggerating the left’s “decline” and “blame.” While some are “concerned” or ‘want more’, they are also patient, hopeful and restrained
Furthermore, both of you know it, too. Give me some polls to prove your point how things are as you state them to be. …Citing several columns, then picking and choosing your select bits, isn’t specific enough– you’re working with large generalizations.
Show me the _need_ for Obama to speak out. As it is not significant for him politically, ideally, theoretically, nor pragmatically, there is not need— He is not president.
Your argument still fails. You haven’t made your case.
Well…the Arab world certainly seems to think 0bama should be speaking out! They astutely point out 0bama’s statements on just about everything else except the Israel/Gaza situation, and the Muslim American voters who organized get out the vote drives in front of their mosques [try that, you 501c3 Christian churches!] are extremely disappointed in 0bama’s silence….
As for it not being significant politically, au contraire. It is ALWAYS about politics. ALWAYS. Political significance is one thing, politicial expedience is quite another, especially when looking ahead to 2012.
The campaign is far from over.
Polls? OMG! I got a laugh outta that one! Talk about a telling comment. A representative of the American people (Senator, President-elect, President) should not rule by pop poll, but by what’s right. If the guy tries to run by pop polls, then it’s nothing more than American Idol.
Obama is silent because he doesn’t know what to do. I’ve not picked and chosen obscure tidbits, but quoted MANY Democratic Party leaders, and clearly shown their complete polar confusion on how to react to Israel and Hamas. Obama is a scared little puppy, and that’s why he’s silent right now. He could be out there agreeing with President Bush and adding muscle to US calls for peace. Nope. He could be out there saying he differs with President Bush (which wouldn’t be news at all given his 2 yrs of BDS), but he’s not. Instead, he’s surfing, and letting the problems in Gaza go unaddressed-something=losing credibility with the likes of Al Jazeera, and surely the Palestinians.
Where’s the polls? OMG that is WAAAAAAY too funny. What’s the poll txt code that I’m supposed to send for “confused”? Oh, and if he sings his response to Israel’s bombings, I’ll text twice!
QUESTION: Will Ryan Seacrest replace Chris Matthews?
Simply Done…Whaaaaaat ARE you going on about?????
BTW…Is it true you actually use a pencil sharpener to keep your head sharp?
Scott don’t run away, hiding in trumped up stitches of laughter.
Come on, make your case for Obama ‘the time is NOW’ and he _needs_ to speak out on Gaza.
Simply Done says: “Mike’s argument still fails, as well as yours. You haven’t made your case.”
If that’s a reference to me I haven’t got a clue what you are talking about.
As for the Obaminator I am sure he is just playing it smart:
the time before the inauguration is now (unless, he’s been inaugurated already). Howard Fineman thinks that he’s being tested before being inaugurated.
Simply Done, I think you’re missing the context, understanding, or point about what I meant by the time is now. I’m saying that when Fineman talks about being tested before the inauguration, since now is a time before the inauguration, Fineman is talking about now.
SO, if Obama is being tested…then what’s Pass and what’s Fail?
I look forward to a response re the polls, Ryan Seacrest/Chris Matthews btw. That was WAY FUNNY!
No, Scott, (apologizes, Mike, both of you appear to be interchangable to me), that’s not the context.
You’re running away into Fineman’s context to hide. You made your own context when you said:
“Problem here is…that time is NOW. Barack Obama is being challenged NOW. Some can hide or excuse or apologize for him by saying, “He’s not officially President yet,” but that’s like allowing a drunk driver to get off on a technicality. […] Now, as a President-elect, with the power to actually start taking action (even if the action is in support and/or agreement with President Bush), the guy’s silent. Oh yeah, we got CHANGE alright. A change from constant whining, promising, complaining, suggesting, proposing, and so forth…to silence, inaction, leadership that’s left his party in disarray, fractured, and confused. A man with such great leadership that even his party base-the people who voted for him, sweat for him, gave all their money…those are the people who are actually LOUDER than Republicans?!”
Fineman’s essay is contextualized around the theme of dropping one’s ‘high expectations’ due to the amount of testing Obama will likely take; whereas, your context is Obama’s “constant whining, promising, complaining, suggesting, proposing, and so forth…to [his] silence, inaction, leadership that’s left his party in disarray, fractured, and confused.”
Two different contexts.
You haven’t made your case he even needs to speak, much less that the Dems are in “disarray, fractured, and confused.”
You’re inventing things.
Simply Done: If you can’t tell the difference between Mike, who has never voted for a Democrat in his life and Scott, who frequently makes that mistake then I can’t see what crebility you have on any other point.
that, is referring to Fineman’s claim that he will be tested BEFORE being inaugurated.
The progressive left thinks he should speak
The Democratic Party leaders think his silence on several things is causing problems
including his own silence which is stalling his own stimulus bill
and the mideast is upset w his silence
and his own advisors as well as his party leaders are all over the place (lacking his verbal leadership) on what position to take in re to the Gaza fight
Combined all the quotes from all the Democratic leaders, and all the admin people, and all the leftist media, and all the faux-open-minded-liberal/progressives as presented in those links…and I’d say I’ve made my case with far greater detail than your supposition and “nu-uh”s
If this were a debate. I’d vote that Scott has the stronger position in this exchange of wisdom and idea’s!
If this were a debate. I’d vote that Scott has the stronger position in this exchange of wisdom and idea’s!
(Sorry moderator, leave as is. Thanks)
“small minority” simply sez, based on a poll about leadership from a guy who hasn’t lead anything save the furniture movers to a van??
Ya might want to see what kind of a “leader” Obama is after he leads. Until then, ask 1000 stupid questions of 1000 stupid people, and you get 1000 stupid opinions.
BTW, it is not the “small minority” of FA that is wondering where Obama, da mouth, is on Hamas v Israel. This is now an international media cry. But then, perhaps “simply” simply hasn’t been following this subject that has now appeared as a daily post since Dec 28th. Evidently only simply doesn’t think a “case has been made” for Obama to comment.
Me? Changed my mind. I think I’ll enjoy “that one’s” silence as long as possible…. I’ve been on Obama overload for a couple years now. To not have his mug and comments blasted all over the news 24/7 is truly a gift for awhile.
Thanks, but I think at the root of it all, Simply just doesn’t grasp that Fineman is talking about a time period that is NOW.
likely take? Really? When-’cause fineman says, “before he is inaugurated”
OK, let’s look at them one by one:
Scott says:
“The progressive left thinks he should speak”: Nope. ‘A part of the progressive left, not the progressive left. This aspect is even artists in London, not Americans.
Then you link to the left’s pacifists mag., The Nation, via John Nichols blog. Nichols states Obama should engage his office taking a more active role in the peace process. Nichols argument is predominately moral, not political. Lastly, few even know who Nichols is.
Then to Huff. Post’s Cohen’s ‘underdog argument’ for Gaza grounded, again, in moral duty for Obama to use his political heft and help the peace process.
Above, two marginal voices, one pacifist, the other (an idealist) ashamed of Obama’s silence. …Yet they are still steadfast in hopefulness that he will speak.
Hardly, here, a display of “the progressive left.” You are exaggerating your claims beyond all reality here.
Scott says:
“The Democratic Party leaders think his silence on several things is causing problems:”
You link to The Hill’s “Democratic Unity starts to show cracks”. It should be entitled, ‘Democratic “Unity” starts to show cracks.’ …and of course it will, too– that’s what always happens. But through the entire essay not a single WORD on Obama’s ‘silence is causing problems. You have to infer his that his silence is ‘causing’ the problems. I say it’s simply democratic diversity, a new congress, troubling times….
You are making things up here.
Scott says:
“including his own silence which is stalling his own stimulus bill”: Then you link to your own self titled post, ‘Dems blame Obama for stimulus delay’. Yet to WSJ piece you link to states: ‘Dems are concerned over stimulus plan delays. Yet the WSJ piece can only find one Dem that even voices ‘concern’: Rep. David Obey (D., Wis.), chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, added, “I had been hoping that the timetable would be this week” for having a proposal in hand.” That’s it. Where are the Democrats (plural) that are “blaming” Obama for “stalling” his own bill?
You are making things up, again.
Scott says:
“and the mideast is upset w his silence”: Then you link to an aljazeera’s piece titled, ‘Obama’s Gaza silence condemned ‘. Yes, in the piece his ‘silence’ is condemned …but not in entirely, not even majorily; there is a balance of “condemnation” with “concern”, the piece even ending on an up-note:
“But others at the protest still saw some hope that the former Illinois senator could make a difference.
“I would like to think that he would be more active than Bush in trying to push an agenda to bring Israel and Palestine together to have peace talks, but I don’t know,” said Bob Malone, a lawyer.”
Even the comments on the article run right down the middle.
Here you are closer to accuracy, but accent ONE piece “…in order to prove a miracle”, as they say.
Finally, Scott says:
“and his own advisors as well as his party leaders are all over the place (lacking his verbal leadership) on what position to take in re to the Gaza fight”:
Yet not a single adviser is quoted in the CNN article, you link to, pertaining to the present conflict. You may mention H. Clinton was, but that statement is near a year old and not relevant to this conflict. Lastly party leaders have their own thoughts on this, they are not members of his cabinet.
You have made more stuff up.
Finally, you can’t dissect the truth accurately and simply hype what you want to believe.
You haven’t made the case there is a need to him to speak out, or break his silence.
all of my claims vs simply’s completely unsubstantiated claim? Hmmm, I’ll stick w mine for now.
In the meantime…looks like the man actually CAN speak out. He just chose to do it on an economic stimulus package rather than on Gaza. On that…he remains silent for no reason.
What’s incredibly funny about this is that Obama’s positions on Israel vs terrorists (in 2007 and in 2008) was the same as my position now. I just want him to come out and reaffirm Israel’s right to defend itself, but I don’t think he’s got the nerve to do it now that he’s accountable for such talk, and he’s proven that even though he hasn’t been inaugurated…he can talk.
The piecemeal tactic is a fun one Simply. I used to use it myself, and that’s why I specifically referred to the SUM of my posts while you went after each one. The SUM of my quotes and sources still beats the SUM of yours (0).
Hardly, your sum is the lesser of all its parts.
Anyone that cares to look will find the same.
I suggest you not be so egotistical as to think you’re the only person who looks at my links. Instead, spend some time, and see that
1) Fineman was talking about right now/the present/this current place in time/’before Obama isinaugurated’
2) Obama CAN do more than just sit silently as demonstrated by his words today, and his plan to meet w lawmakers next week
3) When the man’s chief of staff, Natsec advisor, and his own Karl Rove Axelrod all have one position on Gaza, and his Sec State, Speaker of the House, Sen Maj leader, and his own speeches have another, and his Mideast advisor and several Congressional caucus leaders all have a 3rd position….that suggests a lack of unity brought about by a lack of leadership/absence of leadership/silence
4) best of all….you’ll find that Obama’s 2007-2008 position on Israel is the same as mine and all of the writers at Flopping Aces as well as most of the readers
Note also that historically, in the late 20th/early 21st cent it takes-on average-about 5-6 months to plan an air campaign…especially one coupled with a ground war.
“…his famous aloha spirit…”
Pathetic. Newsweek actually paid him to write that? I would advise Newsweek to pay him to retire, and instead look for a mature 18-year-old to write in his place, so that the rest of the editorial staff could learn something about objectivity and quality. The stench given off by the media is nauseating!!
I’m with Mata. I willl be happy as long as he keeps his trap shut. I have this dreadful feeling I am not going to like what he says when he finally speaks. I think he will betray Israel and leave them hanmging in the wind. He said in his book “I will stand with the muslims”. Or, he is so naive, he might say both sides need to sit down with him and resolve these differences. However, having been a muslim himself he should know that religion will not let the muslims agree Israel should exist. I would be happy if he kept silent forever.
Scott, I hope you have finally silenced “Simply”… lol
But, he or she or it, will come back with more useless arguments. That will be the faith of all Obama’s thugs during his reign: useless arguments to defend their clueless Guru.
I’d say obama being silent IS a good thing. I seriously doubt he understands hamas and views them as “reasonable people with legitimate grievances.”
He’s already been playing president with his weekly radio addresses. You might think he could give this crisis a mention. Yes? No? I think he’s sitting it out until he *has* to say something officially as POTUS hoping that it will die down before then. He’s in the weeds.
I’ll say dittos to Mata’s comment about enjoying what little Obama silence we have.
And if it comes down to agreeing with either Democrat Scott or Democrat Simply, I’ll pick Scott.
lol! Meanwhile, over at Thinkmeat, meatbrain’s raggin’ on me and sayin’ I’m on the far right fringe of American politics, a straightup wingnut essentially. Classic.
I’m thinkin’ ole Joe Biden was right about Obama being tested, and his peeps not liking how he deals w it. Seems straightup on the money so far.
“…his famous aloha spirit…”
Obambi’s “aloha spirit” !!! hanging leis round the necks of enemies instead of a rope while wimpering ‘can’t we all just get along’ ?
That aint ‘spirit’ thats a death wish.
.
Simply, I am sorry to be late to the party but please let me try to explain why you are wrong and Scott is correct.
Howard Fineman, Newsweek, January 7, 2009:
“You might expect Republicans to be uncooperative. But, except for refusing to accept the advent of Al Franken as a senator from Minnesota, they have been relatively quiet—knowing, perhaps, that it is folly to attack a guy who won on “HOPE” and who enjoys sky-high approval ratings and the good wishes of the world.
No, it is the Democrats who are giving Obama pre-inaugural fits. And that is not surprising, of course, for they are Democrats. And it must be said that Obama himself hasn’t played his January hand all that well.”
Fineman may be a “minority” but he is a minority with a BIG PULPIT.
BHO had no legal standing during the two years he was running for office; he had no congress, no tools (except the media), and had not taken the oath of office. What he did have was one big mouth. He still has a big mouth. For two years he flapped his lips but said nothing, now his lips are shut. On one side of the isle people are thankful for the respite, on the other there is nervous titter.
On the other hand he has no problem running his mouth on a yet unfinished, unpublished, 1933 style Progressive stimulus package.
Unsubstantiated allegations may cut it in the MSM, but not on FA.