What did other people think of Pres. Obama’s Q&A with the Republicans? The right has grabbed on one section, which they are calling Obama’s “stunning admission,” and they’re going to town on it. Here are some other comments:
secularhumanizinevoluter says (30 January 2010 at 7:27 am): I must be crazy(OK, everybody stop yelling NO DUH!) but all I heard was “you guys have to stop acting so crazy so I can do MORE NEGOTIATING WITH YOU?! AM I crazy or was THAT the jist of what he was saying to them?
Ramsgate says (30 January 2010 at 9:27 am): You got it. “What more do I have to do to make you love me?” (from another comment) I genuinely doubt anything will change.
Ga6thDem says (30 January 2010 at 9:54 am): is it a game changer? Maybe. Obama once in a blue moon comes off like this and then retreats. We shall see.
texan4hillary says (30 January 2010 at 10:27 am): i loved the part where obama finally gave that marsha blackburn of tn a lesson. god that woman annoys me to no end.
Pres. Obama’s real challenge is that without ideology to guide him, his cajoling of Republicans is his only option. He’s not going to lead on policy, because his basic belief is to bring people together, then craft a compromise between what the two sides want.
So, after Obama finishes the Q&A, which was a much better tact than giving another speech, if the Republicans don’t respond, which I don’t think they will because there is nothing in it for them, what is left for Mr. Obama?
Republicans know by now Mr. Obama’s not going to push people around to get some agenda through, because it’s not his style. The only way this works for him is if the people back him over Republicans and Congress, which is a good White House bet, but that doesn’t mean it will do anything for Democrats.
That’s the problem with Pres. Obama. Through showing his willingness to engage, but also his ability to spar with Republicans, he’s resetting things for himself, but because of his policy nonchalance, all of this does very little for anyone else. Unless Republicans decide to jump in and help Democrats, which is about as likely as Pres. Obama re-invigorating his campaign rhetoric on the public option.
Rupert Murdoch (half way through the event):
“Cut it OFF!! STOP the feed! Can’t you see he’s kicking their asses and making them look like buffoons ??
We’ll let O’Reilly and Hannity tell everyone later what really happen.
Interesting:
“Some senior Republican strategists and party veterans are beginning to fret that the party’s refusal to work with President Obama, even when he crosses onto their own philosophical turf, could ultimately erode some of the political gains they’ve made this past year.
Over the past two weeks, Republicans in Congress have united in nearly unanimous opposition to a series of ideologically conservative policy suggestions, starting with a commission to reduce the deficit, a pay-go provision that would limit new expenditures, and a spending freeze on non-military programs.
Opposition has usually been based on specific policy concerns or complaints that the measures aren’t going far enough. But the message being sent is that the GOP’s sole mission is presidential destruction.
Now, some in the party are beginning to worry.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/29/some-republicans-fret-tha_n_442182.html
This is almost funny. Here is FoxNews.com’s Politics stories today: (Um. Wasn’t there a meeting yesterday?)
•Obama proposes 200 million for city’s security ..
•Louisiana Senator to NFL: New Orleans Owns ‘Who Dat!’
•First President Bush Pays Visits to Obama at White …
•Obama’s Rebuke of High Court Highlights Fear of …
•GOP: Obama Has ‘Blind Spot’ on Terror War
•Obama: Cutting Deficit as Important as Job Growth
•$200M Price Tag May Have Doomed NYC Trial Plan
•Obama Faces New Pressure to Try Terror Suspects in
Is it likely Obama would actually move beyond his “policy nonchalance” (great summary phrase, Taylor)? Is it likely Republican’s “fret” and “worry” (per djjl’s Huffington link) is great enough to change obstructionist tactics? And I’d add, is it likely the Democratic congressional majority will act like a majority?
Based on what they’ve all have done in the last year, the likelihood of all three seems small. Hope I’m wrong.
Bottom line, we are SOOOOOO screwed.
“policy nonchalance?” Sending 30,000 additional troops into Afghanistan was showing “policy nonchalance?” Killing hundreds of who knows who using predator drones firing Hellfire missiles is “poilcy nonchalance?” Dumping a massive amount of weaponary into Taiwan pissing off the Chinese is “policy nonchalance?” Speeding up the delivery of new missile defense systems to Persian Gulf countries pissing off Iran is “policy nonchalance?” Putting American boots on the ground in Yemen to coordinate that governments war with al Qaeda and pissing all sorts of people off in the process is “policy nonschalance?” Pretending to want to talk to Iran about its nuclear program while funding the opposition in Iran is “policy nonchalance?” Is everybody asleep or is everybody just too damn busy thinking about health care to see what’s going on all around them? zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Peace
republicans better fret diji. the dems have sucked at showing the fillibuster obstruction by the gop. they have said no to everything. every bill. the dems havent done much but if the gop continues to obstruct in the senate with its 41 votes and the economy improves some they are screwed big time. on plumline polls show most blame the gop for obstruction- a bump from sotu. dems need to highlight the crap the gop is pulling. its nuts and destructive. worse- u think the dems have problems? the gop have tons of it. crist, mccain and a many others are facing tea party challenges. mccain would normally help on immigration this yr- but he wont now with hayword runing against him fromt he right. and heck crist may only win the sen seat inf l if he flips to being a dem. rubio is surging.im getting more pissed at the gop as of late. im tired of them just saying no to anything. if they are labeled as the cuase of so much not getting done then the winds turn to the dems way.
Obama needs to address real Republican concerns. Speeches and promises are not enough this time. Real action this time. So far he has shown no willingness to deal with issues like tort reform though he’s given wonderful lip service to this issue. Politics is a give and take and he wants to take but never give. If he doesn’t start coming to terms with reality, he will have nothing of significance to show for his time in office. Bill Clinton got the message and really started to deal realistically with the other side of the aisle and he got results. Obama was an empty suit during the primaries, he was an empty suit in the general, and a year after inauguration he still is an empty suit.
“nzanh says:
30 January 2010 at 8:46 pm”
JEEEEBUS CRISPIES!!!!!! You are F-U-N-N-Y!!!!
You seriously think tort reform is that big in terms of impact on health care costs?
“The health economists and independent legal experts who study the issue, however, don’t believe that’s true. They say that malpractice liability costs are a small fraction of the spiraling costs of the U.S. health care system, and that the medical errors that malpractice liability tries to prevent are themselves a huge cost– both to the injured patients and to the health care system as a whole.
“It’s really just a distraction,” said Tom Baker, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School and author of “The Medical Malpractice Myth.” “If you were to eliminate medical malpractice liability, even forgetting the negative consequences that would have for safety, accountability, and responsiveness, maybe we’d be talking about 1.5 percent of health care costs. So we’re not talking about real money. It’s small relative to the out-of-control cost of health care.”
Insurance costs about $50-$60 billion a year, Baker estimates. As for what’s often called “defensive medicine,” “there’s really no good study that’s been able to put a number on that,” said Baker.”
Imhotep says:
30 January 2010 at 7:33 pm
Let me ask you something. Were any of those things any difference than what’s come before? –pause– No, I didn’t think so.
Then look at the Middle East, where after the speech in Cairo NOTHING has happened. One year into O’s presidency, with the economy & jobs up front, you think Mr. Obama will tackle anything aggressively in the Middle East that isn’t pretty much in sync with what’s come before?
No, I didn’t think so.
Perhaps the word status quo, decisions that won’t cause a stir from the usual suspects, would help you understand.
Ailes! Hilarious. Not surprised, djjl.
ps-Thanks for the emails, lurkers, I appreciate you chiming in.
My point is there are MANY concerns of the Republicans. Tort reform is only one of them. But since I brought up tort reform, the CBO estimates that comprehensive medical liability reform would reduce federal budget deficits by roughly $54 billion over the next 10 years.
Another concern is the imposition of about a half-trillion dollars of new fees and taxes that will be pushed directly onto the consumer. These fees and taxes will cause premium increases way before most reforms take effect. Then, after forcing premiums to go up, the legislation makes it mandatory to buy health insurance.
Other Republican concerns and wants are the ability to buy insurance across state lines and limit illegal alien ability receive the benefits of this health reform bill.
The Republicans have tried to express concerns and proffer solutions but they claim the Dems turn a deaf ear. If Obama exercised a modicum of leadership and expressed a sincere interest (in word AND deed) to do business with reasonable Republicans, I’ll wager that a health reform bill could be signed before the end of the year is out.
nzanh says:
30 January 2010 at 9:53 pm
I’m sorry, but are you nuts?
The Republicans want Obama to FAIL. They won’t join in because Obama is not a threat and will not do ANYTHING if they continue to say no. There is no cost to saying no. There is only reward, which begins in Nov.
Hell, Obama can’t even make Dems join in. NOBODY FEARS HIM.
But thanks for the laugh about tort reform. That was actually funny.
Taylor Marsh says:
30 January 2010 at 10:06 pm
Absolutely. Taylor, I agree with you completely.
Someday we should all talk about the consequences of bi-partisanship if Obama does get the cuddly relationship he hopes for with the republicans. It may not be as good for the country as he thinks. The right to bear arms in school and church. Who knows
Well Taylor, I do acknowledge that the calendar is not in the Dem’s favor what with the November elections coming up. It may be that Obama will have to wait until after the November elections to really get the Republicans to start talking seriously. But he needs to start talking and engaging the other side on THEIR concerns (one of them–it comes up again and again– IS tort reform). He needs to get Bill Clinton to the White House, listen and start taking advise from the master. Bill Clinton got things done!
Furthermore, healthcare reform has to be scaled down with incremental changes. You cannot force on the American people these massive changes to the status quo, even when they know it’s broken. He should have learned this after Bill Clinton’s failed attempt to reform the system. At any rate, Obama needs SOMETHING to show for all this expended political capital. Even if something comes out of Congress after the November elections. So it seems to me it would be in his best interest to start the talks now.
I get so discouraged listening to all the bullshit out there about why healthcare costs are escalating so fast. I have two words: (a) smoking; and (b) obesity. If we make serious progress in reducing those two conditions in the population, our health care costs will drop dramatically. If not, health care costs will continue to spiral out of control. Sound public policy will be based on those simple facts. Which I have yet to see as more than a mere footnote in the debate of the last several months.
If it were only so simple Minstrelof my time.Have you taken a good hard look at congress?