Friday, January 29, 2010

Failing to Recognize the Situation

The left is apparently crowing about the Q&A session Obama had with House Republicans because he stood up to them and lectured them and claimed he was not an ideologue and so forth...

They fail to recognize that if the House GOP members really wanted to grill Obama, they would do so. However, if they were gang up on the President and attack him like they want to, it would be an even worse PR move than letting the President have his way with them in a verbal fashion.

If they really went after him, the lefty talking heads and media would say things like "they cornered Obama like a pack of rabid wolves!" and "the way they treated the President was classless and sickening!"

So while Obama did a good job taking advantage of the situation, don't get too excited, my friends on the's not like the GOP had any better options of approach.


zen said...

Oh, if they about not recognizing the situation.
The fact is that this is the type of transparency that the people deserve and should be demanding. A sitting president goes to the opposition party, takes their questions, and displays a mastery of their proposals. At the same time he dispels the myths, and distortions they have used all session long to obstruct from the people's business—and pins that responsibility not only on the Republicans, but his own party.
An adult stood up and said, enough!
We should welcome this behavior.

The resulting House Republican PR nightmare that this is sure to be seen as, is the well-deserved shame that the Republicans have earned.

Phil Chroniger said...

I do welcome the transparency, but given the pedestal that Obama is placed on by the talking heads who aren't on Fox News, it's not like the Republicans were in any position to really press Obama hard. Therefore, while the transparency is's not like the GOP could really press Obama and not get even worse PR from it.

So, they took the less-damaging approach of letting Obama walk all over them (which Obama supporters think the GOP should do in the first place).

I'm just calling it for what it is, Zen.

zen said...

You're calling it like it is, to you. I see it another way.

"given the pedestal that Obama is placed on by the talking heads who aren't on Fox News,"

Let's not forget that the office to which the electorate placed Obama is what really matters. Despite proclamations that Obama would be given a chance, many in that House Republican bunch set off straight-away to undermining the president and his agenda.

Recall the summer town hall frenzies—stoked by slanderous distortions and attacks—upon the president and his executive agenda the people elected him to accomplish. People in that very House Republican body, like Michele Bachmann for example, tossed around "Anti-American" all across the nation. And worse.

So now the president comes before that opposition party and calls them on it. Great! Be accountable! Somehow we are supposed to feel sorry for those poor, pitiful Republicans? With all due respect, Phil, I call Bullshit.

That kind of transparency, and immediate accountability is refreshing beyond belief.

Phil Chroniger said...

I didn't say feel sorry for them. I'm just saying that they really didn't have a better option. I'm speaking solely from a "political posturing" point of view, here. I guarantee you that if Obama thought he would come out of this meeting with the House Republicans looking worse than he did before it...he would not have gone. While the transparency is nice, there is a bit of political grandstanding here.

Now let's think about this...the tea partyists don't like Obama's health care plan. The GOP doesn't like Obama's health care plan. Why WOULDN'T the GOP jump on the tea party bandwagon? I know many in the tea party don't necessarily like the GOP jumping on the bandwagon (the party, not the voters, mind you), but they know that the Republicans and the Blue Dog Dems were their only shot at undermining Obama's attempts to expand government beyond what they felt was acceptable.

Now before you go into "well, Bush expanded government, too" (the typical counter to Republicans/conservatives being against bigger government), I am aware of that. I can't speak for anyone else, but I can speak for myself when I say that I did not like it when Bush did it, either. You, of all people, know that I do not march in line well with the GOP agenda (though their drumbeat and mine match more closely than with the Dems, obviously).

Mind you, there were several amendments proposed by Republicans that were shot down along party lines, as well. This partisanship works both ways, my friend, and you know that.