President Obama In 2010: Publicly Demonstrating Leadership In Crisis

A White House aide tells me that President Obama issued a clear order Tuesday night, just before 6 p.m., when his national security aide Denis McDonough told him there had been an earthquake in Haiti: He told McDonough that he wanted an aggressive and highly coordinated response.

Aggressive it has been. He was briefed twice on Tuesday night, and briefed again by four different agencies and individuals before 10 a.m. Wednesday. He cancelled a planned speech on clean energy jobs, along with a side trip to Maryland, and spent the afternoon working the phones, talking to the U.S. ambassador to Haiti, to Secretary of State, to the USAID administrator and the leaders of Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Chile and the United Nations.The White House website has been turned into a fundraising hub for the Red Cross, and the White House has emailed its list with an appeal to give money.

The full horror of the catastrophe is not yet clear, and it could be weeks before we truly know how effective the U.S. government response has been. But there is little doubt that Obama is seizing the moment to demonstrate, for the second time in the New Year, that he can perform as a crisis president. In fact, Obama’s entire run in 2010 so far been dominated by muscular, public and dutiful demonstrations of authority in the face of crisis.

The first demonstration, in response to the failed Christmas Day bombing, initially carried with it a sense of a do-over.  Obama’s aides felt stung by the press criticism after Christmas, when Obama initially opted to hold off public comments, work behind the scenes and, to the dismay of several columnists, play golf. So after returning to Washington, by contrast, Obama gave two public addresses, abandoning his uber-cool façade and twice appearing visibly aggravated at the failures in U.S. intelligence that allowed the attack to take place.

Now Obama is again taking the upper hand, heading into the crisis head first and in public. There is reason to think the tactic is good politics as well. A Quinnipiac poll released Wednesday contained mostly bad news for Obama: His approval rating is declining, many of his policies are unpopular, and his party is in a tough spot heading into the midterm elections. (Just 45 percent of Americans think Obama shares their views on important issues.) The poll points to other concerns as well: Thirty-five percent of respondents think Obama’s policies have made the country less safe, compared to 24 percent who think the country is safer and 38 percent who see no real change. Fifty percent think Obama “isn’t tough enough in standing up to the rest of the world,” while 46 percent disagree with that statement.

But Obama’s abilities to handle problems are still widely praised. The same poll found 66 percent of Americans, including 45 percent of Republicans and 64 percent of independents, say Obama has “strong leadership qualities.” In other words, Obama’s ability to take charge in tough situations is something that actually does have bipartisan appeal.

Related Topics: Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Mitt Romney’s Sweet Spot: Just Conservative Enough

    Why is Mitt Romney having trouble winning over the conservative Republican base? One reason is his lack of political finesse, an air of dorky rich-guy aloofness that reminds some people of John Kerry. More important, however, is his ideological profile. In almost every important way, Romney’s policy platform is more moderate than those of Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum. Gingrich  offers a much more conservative tax plan, along with crowd-pleasing ideas like his plan to sic federal marshals on “radical” liberal judges. Santorum carries a blazing social-conservative torch, championing ideas like a constitutional ban on abortion. Both Gingrich and Santorum talk quite openly about the virtues of bombing Iran. Romney’s temperature runs cooler in all these areas. Not to mention his past record of pro-choice, pro-gay rights positions. As Jon Chait notes today, the GOP establishment is defending Romney but also working hard to push him to the right.

    Romney: 'I Misspoke'HuffPost Politics

    Conflict Over Obama’s Contraception Rule Intensifies

    The Administration’s decision to require Catholic charities and universities to provide free birth control through employee health coverage is several weeks old, but the maelstrom of dissent it’s created is widening. Republicans, who charge that the measure violates such organizations’ religious freedoms, have allied with Catholic groups in opposition, and in recent days a handful of high-profile Democrats have joined their ranks in calling on the Administration to broaden exemptions from the rule.

  • spob

    Michael, you’re drooling.

  • textee

    Was this press release written by Obama for Time magazine or written by Time magazine (on its knees) for Obama? Maybe it was written by Jonah Goldberg as satire of Obama’s useful idiots (i.e., the Washington press corps)?

  • gysgt213

    I knew it.

  • jcapan

    “Thirty-five percent of respondents think Obama’s policies have made the country less safe, compared to 24 percent who think the country is safer and 38 percent who see no real change. Fifty percent think Obama ‘isn’t tough enough in standing up to the rest of the world,’ while 46 percent disagree with that statement.”

    If remotely reliable, these results testify to a nation still deeply warped by 8 years of neo-fascism. The “policies” aren’t that f’ing diff.

  • stuartzechman

    Michael Scherer

    Obama’s aides felt stung by the press criticism after Christmas, when Obama initially opted to hold off public comments, work behind the scenes and, to the dismay of several columnists, play golf. So after returning to Washington, by contrast, Obama gave two public addresses, abandoning his uber-cool façade and twice appearing visibly aggravated at the failures in U.S. intelligence that allowed the attack to take place.

    Well, thank god “several columnists” were on hand to express “dismay”. Lord knows where the nation would be without “press criticism” of the effort politicians need make towards the appearance of “muscular, public and dutiful demonstrations of authority”….probably a whole lot less comforted while our public integrity-bound press-corps maximizes anxieties over a kid with explosives in his underwear, that’s where! Where would we get our desperately needed demonstrations of authority to calm and soothe our raging fears over terrorists and their super-powers and kung fu grip?
    .

    .
    With a press corps like ours, it’s certain that the terrorists will fail miserably…to terrorize…the American people…Yes, that’s right. We’re just like the British during the battle of Britain…apart from facing the Luftwaffe nightly, and remaining calm, courteous and courageous in the face of huge bombs exploding in all our major cities, and citizens evacuating to subway tunnels year after year, and the literal threat of invasion by a vast army of Nazis. That’s just like how we are right now with our superb press corps! How could the terrorists possibly win?
    .
    Also, isn’t it just super that we have people like the “aides” who “felt stung by the press criticism” in charge of national affairs? Isn’t that the most awesome display of strength there is, when the most powerful administration in the world jumps up and down in fearful reaction to the “dismay of several columnists”? What aides were these, Michael Scherer? Who told you about this episode in these terms? Why, surely such honest dealers would put their names to their claims, right Michael Scherer?
    .
    Well, all I can say is that having a President who will, at a relative moment’s notice, abandon an “uber-cool façade” for the façade of visible aggravation just fills me with total confidence that the focus of this Administration is problem-solving, not posturing. Super.
    .
    I’m also supremely heartened by a press corps that focuses on real problems to solve, not the political posturing of the new Daddy-Figure-In-Chief to demonstrate his “ability to take charge”, and its moment-by-moment effects on public perception.
    .
    Thanks for this substantial review and critique of the Administration’s security image handling and public relations efforts, subsequent polling of attitudes, Michael Scherer. I’m sure we’re all much safer as a nation for your efforts…at least I feel 2/3rds safer, anyway.

  • stuartzechman
  • tjoyce994

    What issue do you have with the way he has handled the Haiti crisis?

  • http://melissasouza.wordpress.com melissasouza

    These polls are categorically and certifiably RIDICULOUS! Michael, did you REALLY take a good look at the poll you cite? First of all, you make a big deal of the 35% of the polled who think Obama has made us less safe, when the other numbers, added together, show that 60% of those polled see either no difference or an improvement in safety–and doesn’t that much touted 35% jive with the percentage of the Tea Party-Cheneyite-Birther part of the population? So why highlight this number as if it were a shocker? Second, the same poll cites roughly half/half split in the number of those who say Obama isn’t “tough enough with the rest of the world”, with a slight majority saying he’s a wimp, basically, and then the SAME poll goes on to cite that a robust majority, almost 70%, think the President has “strong leadership qualities”. So which is it, folks? Is the President a wimp who is making us less safe, or is he a strong leader? The contradictions in these stupid polls, especially this Quinnipac, which has been giving Obama a consistently bad time, are staggering. Poll watching is just a way for bored, hungry pundits to keep earning their increasingly irrelevant paychecks.

  • Paul-no not that one

    If I read this correctly it’s all projection by MS.

    Everything is PR and nothing is genuine in the eyes of our media.

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    As much as I like Obama, I nevertheless find this post very puzzling. I too could issue orders such as “I want an aggressive and highly coordinated response” and it would carry just as much meaning which is to say – none at all. Now Obama is a very bright fellow and I suspect he actually is doing everything he can to see to it that the US contribution to the relief effort is significant and effective but telling reporters that that’s what he’s doing contributes absolutely zero to the actual cause. One suspects that the real problem with Obama’s disaster response is that the press corps itself doesn’t get the rush of self-importance they think they deserve.

  • gysgt213

    “and doesn’t that much touted 35% jive with the percentage of the Tea Party”
    .
    Its also President Sarah Palin numbers.

  • Art Pepper

    Obama’s aides felt stung by the press criticism [...]. So after returning to Washington, by contrast, Obama gave two public addresses, abandoning his uber-cool façade [...]

    Channeling Maureen Dowd again, I see.

    With political discourse this stupid, it’s amazing we’re not all f##ing living in straw huts.

  • http://melissasouza.wordpress.com melissasouza

    That same poll also shows that 35%, the exact number of those who say Obama has made the country less safe, also think that the country would be better off if John McCain were President. In other words, that number is meaningless, because, as I state below, it corresponds to the Birther-Cheneyite-Tea Party portion of the population. The numbers to watch are the other two, which taken together represent a robust majority of 60% of the population thinking that Obama either has kept us equally as safe as or safer than Bush. As for saying that the President doesn’t stand up to the rest of the world, well, how do you square that with the 66% of respondents saying that Obama is a strong leader? Your word–RELIABLE–is crucial here. I have my qualms about how these questions are worded, and I also find them incredibly fragmented and disconnected. Do you think Obama stands up to the rest of the world? Do you think he shows strong leadership qualities? How can these two questions solicit such contradictory answers if these polls are indeed reliable?

  • Joe Bftsplk

    What’s going on here — has Obama installed a tire swing and started serving barbecue?

  • Matt

    But will the public take the time to notice while they’re either looking for work or worrying they may lose their jobs? I agree that Obama has been spot-on in crisis, but Americans want the same vigor on the economy.

    http://www.political-buzz.com/

  • http://melissasouza.wordpress.com melissasouza

    I actually listened to a couple of terrorism experts stating that Obama’s INITIAL Mr. Cool response was the APPROPRIATE one. Unfortunately, the hysterical, shallow, unbearable MSM, in collusion with demagogue politicians, couldn’t let this stand and had to create a circus. Al Quaeda must be laughing its head off.

  • Friar Tuck

    Sucking in sucky noise-machine suckage, or tooling in toolish noise-machine toolage? They’re both delicious, so why not choose both!
    .
    meh.

  • jcapan

    FT, you just can’t quit us can ya?

  • jcapan

    “… it’s amazing we’re not all f##ing living in straw huts” … yet?

  • Friar Tuck

    “You just keep me hangin’ on . . . and there ain’t nothin’ I can do about it!” (the Vanilla Fudge cover version).
    .
    I’m very grateful that SZ is thinking clearly so that I don’t have to. I’m worn out with Lutheran-on-Lutheran violence (verbal only of course – we’re Lutherans!) and am giving my psyche the night off.
    .
    Glad y’all kept the light on for me!

  • gysgt213

    I think Obama may have found some rub that beats McCains.

  • jcapan

    Melissa, excellent pts (about the particular poll and in general). However, regardless of %, I’m fascinated that large #s of citizens fail to recognize the cohesiveness of our foreign policies (R+D), or the utter insanity of: “President Barack Obama will ask Congress for an additional $33 billion to fight unpopular wars in Afghanistan and Iraq on top of a record $708 billion for the Defense Department next year” -AP
    .
    Portraying our President in a poor/favorable light vis a vis unreliable polling, all very compelling, but I deem it theatre. I’d much prefer a discourse that acknowleges the uniform batsh!t-crazy of our fo-po. Americans must find the carciatures entertaining: Cheney the tough daddy that gives David Brooks wood, while Obama is an effete wus. Hahaha, meanwhile, the world ain’t much diff this year than in 2008.

  • spob

    That;s obviously not textee’s point. Are you so enamored with Obama that you cannot see a journalist donning knee pads and assuming the position?

  • jcapan

    “Glad y’all kept the light on for me!”
    .
    Reminds me of “A Clean Well-Lighted Place”
    .
    “It was the light of course but it is necessary that the place be clean and pleasant. You do not want music. Certainly you do not want music. Nor can you stand before a bar with dignity although that is all that is provided for these hours. What did he fear? It was not a fear or dread, It was a nothing that he knew too well. It was all a nothing and a man was a nothing too. It was only that and light was all it needed and a certain cleanness and order. Some lived in it and never felt it but he knew it all was nada y pues nada y nada y pues nada. Our nada who art in nada, nada be thy name thy kingdom nada thy will be nada in nada as it is in nada. Give us this nada our daily nada and nada us our nada as we nada our nadas and nada us not into nada but deliver us from nada; pues nada. Hail nothing full of nothing, nothing is with thee. He smiled and stood before a bar with a shining steam pressure coffee machine.”
    .
    E. Hemingway

  • bobcn1

    Are these polls indicators of how well Obama is doing or are they really indicators of how well Fox News is doing?

  • stuartzechman

    Thank God you’re here, both of you.

  • Ivy_B

    Friar, I really have missed you. Today’s discussions made me say that I was a Presbyterian – although not a predestined one, therefore Presby no more! But as tiresome as some of the topics were, today felt a bit like the old Swamp and having you back makes it all the more so.
    .
    I’m leaving in the morning for six days in Boston – no computer access and all those political ads. Sigh. Glad we had a good day so that I could procrastinate from packing!
    .
    Cheers

  • nthompson1025

    Have just 1 question. Where was Obama when Ohio flooded?

  • abdullah69

    Given the most recent addition to Fox, I much prefer the Vanilla Fudge cover of The Zombies’ “She’s not there” but that is by the by.

    To the last President’s credit he did despatch a carrier battle group to Aceh after the 2004 tsunami, overriding the misgivings of the Indonesian government, but by then the damage of Iraq had been done. Obama is in the position whereby he must respond aggressively to every international humanitarian disaster to avoid slipping back to the international pariah state that Bush created. Singing “We are the world” will just not do anymore.

  • sacredh

    FT: Come back on a regular basis. Your wit and wisdom has been sorely missed. I’m trying to snark for the both of us but it’s wearing me out.

  • aah1015

    what a pointless critique. why don’t you attempt to refute scherer’s commentary instead of just whining and spewing nonsense. really though. please explain to me how this assessment of obama’s actions with regard to the recent crises is inaccurate or deserving of contempt. i’m just dying to know.

  • rustyreturns

    “But there is little doubt that Obama is seizing the moment to demonstrate, for the second time in the New Year, that he can perform as a crisis president.”

    .
    Ah, Michael. A “second” crisis? You are really serious in calling the Christmas bomber episode a crisis? What exactly did Obama do?
    .
    I seem to remember that a fellow traveler on the plane subdued the bomber. Nothing more than a little fire on the plane ensued. Obama came on TV about 3 days later, with little more than to say “alledged bomber”. This is a crisis? Did they scramble Air Force One and we didn’t know about it? Was there a full alert to the highest level, grounding all flights in and out of the United States?
    .
    Now Haiti is a terrible thing. If Obama is taking charge, then I would suggest he take total control, fly Air Force One to Port au Prince, and begin giving orders on the ground. If you could, flatten all the tires so he can’t fly back here. We’ll send him a postcard when they get mail delivery back up again, and just say “Miss you, but please stay where you are really needed”!!!

  • Friar Tuck

    Bless all of you for your sentiments!

    Between the two of us, Mrs. Tuck and I are holding down four part-time jobs. It’s keeping the lights on and the pantry stocked, so no complaints, but I think I broke my brain somewhere along the way. I trust it will mend, but I’m pretty much reduced to one-liners for the nonce.

    Extended theological reflection is outside my performance envelope for the time being, so I’m really pleased that SZ in particular is posting stuff I would be happy to have posted myself – the Swamp is in good hands.

  • Friar Tuck

    I miss paragraph separators.

  • stuartzechman

    FT:
    .
    You’re much too generous, but thank you for your kind words.
    .
    Please drop by every moment or two in between crushing workloads.
    .
    It is satisfying to be read by someone who well understands what meaning is attempted, I must say.

  • http://baeack.com/president-obama-in-2010-publicly-demonstrating-leadership-in/ President Obama In 2010: Publicly Demonstrating Leadership In … » Barack Obama Latest News – Barack Obama News

    [...] is the original post: President Obama In 2010: Publicly Demonstrating Leadership In … Posted in barack-obama | Tagged aide-tells, clear-order, denis, haiti, national, president, [...]

  • vwcat

    Seems to me that the press is much to blame for public perception.
    While you guys still think it’s the Bush era and you all were whining over xmas because Obama did not strut around in an idiotic flightsuit and make a bunch of childish slogans like ‘dead or alive’, the public becomes influenced by your pouting.
    The press are suckers for the faux tough guy bragging by the rightwing and fails to call them out for their childish reactions, whining, thumb sucking fear that is obvious to everyone else.
    The rightwing is good at pretending. The press never figured it out.
    They have been convinced that level headed, non panic and adult reactions to crisis is what is needed.
    Instead they still believe the fearmongering, thumb sucking rightwing over reaction is the way it is suppose to be.
    And, after 8 years of it, many in the public still believe the hogwash.
    It’s up to you in the press to educate the public, not play fanboy for someone in a dressup flightsuit.
    You are suppose to educate people that handling a crisis needs a cool head and not empty, simplistic slogans.

  • vwcat

    Rusty, that would be Cheney and his little spawn, Liz, who should be sent permanently to Haiti without any communications.
    I personally want the adult.
    The rightwings pants wetting and thumb sucking in fear helps no one. While you guys run around like henny penny screaming the sky is falling everytime someone says ‘boo’, I’d rather have the cool headed Obama come out and make an understated remark and not play to fear and panic.
    You may like being manipulated by the fearmongering but, I find it embarrassing that America has become filled with fraidy cats because they have been taught to be that way by the rightwing and their manipulations.
    I find the press very embarrassing to see them roll over and play lapdog for Flightsuit McChimpy and then cry like babies because Obama acted like an adult with everything under control and not over reacting.

  • vwcat

    Excellent,.
    Just excellent.
    I have been making the same complaints about the press myself.
    They are filled with thrills when the president struts in a flightsuit and postures and preens while making simplistic slogans for the 10 year old minds of the rightwing base.
    But, they spend every hour writing and whining on air over how terrible it is when our new president dares to be an adult and not play the fear mongerer and manipulator. Not act like the right, who the press cannot for the life of them, see that the so-called tough image of the repubs is just that and they are in reality a bunch of bed wetting thumb sucking chickens.
    It is the cool head and not over reacting that to me is the sign of strength. Not the playing dressup and shouting out slogans.

  • kbanginmotown

    Michael: If you are willing to spell “façade” with a cedilla, you should certainly be willing to spell “über” with an umlaut…
    .
    And, seriously, can we save the “analysis” of “Leadership in Crisis” until, say, the crisis has been dealt with?

  • rustyreturns

    “Aggressive it has been. He was briefed twice on Tuesday night, and briefed again by four different agencies and individuals before 10 a.m. Wednesday. He cancelled a planned speech on clean energy jobs, along with a side trip to Maryland, and spent the afternoon working the phones, talking to the U.S. ambassador to Haiti, to Secretary of State, to the USAID administrator and the leaders of Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Chile and the United Nations.”

    .
    The White House talking points are clearly written in the above statement from Michael.
    .
    Aggressive it has been. (Shades of Star Wars, Yoda), Briefed twice on Tuesday night so he was.
    .
    Please give me a freaking break. Briefed twice? Then “briefed” 4 more times? What they stole his boxer briefs from him? Or was it a panty raid in the White House? About the only “briefing” in this White House is when Emanuel and the other loon side kick, Axelrod, are giving each other wedges with their briefs.
    .
    Then “cancelled” a speech on “clean” energy jobs. Whoop-dee-do!!! 800 BILLION dollars spent, and all we get in return is a speech, well cancelled speech on clean energy jobs? God truly must be laughing his ass off.
    .
    Americans do not want to hear all the bogus bull-crap that you spew out for Obama’s White House Michael. Just let us know he is simply doing his job.

  • Dee in Columbia MD

    What would you rather listen to Rusty, Limbaugh’s obnoxious response or Pat Robertson’s delusional stories?

  • kevin

    10,000 people died in the Ohio floods?
    .
    No? So that was completely different? OK.

  • Dee in Columbia MD

    Wouldn’t that be a lot like waiting for Obama to be in office for more than a year before critiquing his presidency?

  • nflfoghorn

    I think it’s fair to assess how he responds to crises, primarily because neo-cons remain ready to pick on him anytime he responds differently than they expect. Flush talks about BO taking 3 WHOLE DAYS to respond to the undiebomber, conveniently forgetting that it took Dubya six days to say anything about the shoe bomber. They are right because they say they are, not because they care about truth. You don’t hear a peep outa them about that “botched” pirate rescue, do ya?

  • nflfoghorn

    I’m thinking he’s more into “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest.”

  • homerhk

    PNNTO – This is the most succinct and on point comment on this thread. It simply can’t be that Obama wants an aggressive response to the crisis because he wants to help human beings in time of need – no, it’s because he wants to project the image of good crisis management. The cynicism of the press and MS in particular knows absolutely no bounds.

  • http://privcorr.blogspot.com/ wvng

    Matt, with even AEI reporting that the stimulus bill is the reason why the economy is not in negative growth, and is responsible for more than a million jobs created or retained, the only way to look at this is to thank god that Obama was elected and McCain wasn’t. Obama and the Dems prevented a depression. Sure the stimulus bill could have been stronger, but it is clearly working as intended and is having the intended impact on the economy. The jobs bill the Dems are putting together now willalso make a significant difference. And no republicans will vote for it.

  • nflfoghorn

    This ain’t Motel 6, bub. :)

  • Dee in Columbia MD

    I plan to remind voters in 2010 about how they slammed this president before they figured out he was doing the exact right thing. Reminding voters of what cynical, political opportunists Republicans are and that its all they are because they have no plan for the future except more of the same failed policies of the past is how we win.

  • 3xfire3

    rusty, It sounds like Michael, JK and the Obama crew is pushing a very big PR campaign. It’s amasing how the liberal press jumps in to help with such projects. They will do anything to try and make Obama look good which is not an easy task.
    My heart goes out to the people of Hati. They suffer in good times and now are suffering greatly. I hope we do our share to provide help to them. I plan to be of as much help as I can. They are in my prays and I will continue to be of help through “Food for the Poor” which is one of the best organizations to provde help to Hati. I am a long time supporter of the people of Hati through this great organization.

  • 53_3

    I think that one of the things Obama is doing is demonstrating to the rest of the world that the US will tolerate no more embarrassments like Katrina.

  • http://o-for-obama.com/news/morning-news-48/ Morning News | O-FOR-OBAMA

    [...] Time Magazine: A White House aide tells me that President Obama issued a clear order Tuesday night, just before 6 p.m., when his national security aide Denis McDonough told him there had been an earthquake in Haiti: He told McDonough that he wanted an aggressive and highly coordinated response. [...]

  • newfreedomblog

    Well first I’ll respond to more coherent comments to my comment.
    .
    You are so right on 3xfire3. The people of Haiti have been struggling for many many years. Under a dictatorship that was nothing more than what Idi Amin had n Africa. All for me and nothing for you. Millions suffered under “Papa Doc” and later by his ruthless son, “Baby Doc”. I don’t think the more recent Governments have been much better.
    .
    Thank you for your support of Haiti.
    .
    To 53_3, I agree. I believe Obama has a lot at stake to prove yet again, that he can be force of great help to Haiti, and will not allow a “katrina-like” event, both horrible natural disasters occur. However, I also know that you feel that Bush did not do anything to help with Katrina, but New Orleans suffered the worst natural disaster ever to hit the US, and I think what you may find out, Obama will also struggle because of the magnitude of both Haiti’s current problems, and how George Bush also struggled with the magnitude of the devastation of Katrina. Time will be the judge, not either of us.
    .
    Dee…I really do not understand what you are trying to say. Perhaps you can define it better for me, then I may comment back to you. If it is just a liberal snide remark, don’t waste your valuable time or mine.
    .
    And to the foghorn. Keep blowing baby. It’s just noise as usual from you.

  • Dee in Columbia MD

    It’s amazing to me that Republicans only look at life through a political lens. While not only projecting that mindset onto the motives of the left but also declaring it a flaw in their character. They freely and indiscriminately throw around an accusatory tone at this president for projecting America’s power for good, while always demanding that America’s power be projected for ill. These people are either schizophrenic or stupid because ether they can’t make up their mind or they don’t know its contradictory. But either way it’s proof that they don’t have the character for leadership.
    .

  • 53_3

    We will have to disagree on Bush’s response to Katrina, newfreedomblog.
    .
    Major disasters aren’t new to the US, and NOLA’s needed relief was no greater than others (Camille, the 08 SF earthquake, Galveston, Andrew) and all except NOLA were met by a concerted federal effort within hours (even the 08 SF quake!).
    .
    I think a combination of ideology and confusion on the part of Bush’s team led to the Katrina debacle, and no way was it “too large” a disaster to handle on the national level. There were 50 military bases within 500 miles of NOLA. This ideological mindset created a vacuum that led to, besides Nagin’s miscues, actions (the Gretna Police) that prevented the evacuation of the Superdome on foot through the community of Gretna through a federally mandated evacuation route.
    .
    Other than that, I think Obama will do well, but it should be noted that the epicenter of the quake was under Port Au Prince, and more than 100,000 are dead. I think I heard that 3 million are homeless.
    .
    I don’t think in my lifetime I have ever heard of a major earthquake like this having it’s epicenter directly under a major city. We had one here in 2003 of similar magnitude, and it was 57 miles away, and another in ’65 whose epicenter was 30 miles away. Cities are such small targets that such an occurrence is extremely rare.

  • 53_3

    As an addendum, your right on time being the judge.

    Some authoritative apolitical links like levees.org and sourcewatch provide voluminous information on the Katrina debacle.

  • grape_crush

    The first demonstration, in response to the failed Christmas Day bombing, initially carried with it a sense of a do-over…
    .
    That’s just stupid, Michael; a failed bombing and a huge natural disaster are different types of events/crisis which should have different levels of response.

  • 3xfire3

    newfreedom, Thank you for your thoughtful post. It’s nice to here from a sane person on occasion on this very liberal website

  • iggydwonderllama

    Exactly my reaction as well. Well said.

  • nflfoghorn

    I resemble that remark, NFB. But what am I supposed to do – let patently ridiculous remarks go unchallenged? A major disaster is going on and yet those of your persuasion think our leadership is worried more about image than about helping. Your loss.

  • 53_3

    I see three mistakes here.
    .
    1. Pat Robertson’s and Rush Limbaugh’s (I’m sure Glenn will chime in with more, and soon!) hateful speech help promote the stereotypical labels currently attached to the GOP and conservatives.
    .
    So if they really want to avoid the labels that are being reinforced on a daily basis like this, maybe they should tell their own peers to STFU. Otherwise, instead of getting upset about it, just accept it and realize that until you (they) do clean up their peers conduct, it will just have to be endured. It’s not “our” problem. It’s theirs.
    .
    2. If Obama were to be faulted for “looking in the mirror” as claimed, then wouldn’t such charges be reinforced by inaction rather than the forceful action taken? I mean come on! I could see such charges being valid if he were playing a fiddle or something, or waiting two days after Harry Connick Jr. showed up with 18 truckloads of aid before doing anything, but he’s doing something now.
    .
    3. The word “liberal” is being used like a rag. It doesn’t have meaning in this context other than “you don’t agree politically with me”. However, I guess I can see in point number 1 the hint that maybe I and others will have to just grin and bear it.

  • omgamike

    I prefer to look at background history on Haiti, leading up to this natural disaster. We in the US should be out front trying to help the people of Haiti, being as it was our policies with regard to Haiti, both in democratic “and” republican administrations, that have led up to Haiti being in the miserable condition it is in. It was US policies that propped up dictators and ruthless governments in Haiti, effectively killing every chance they have had to have true democratic governments and democratic reforms that would benefit the “people” of Haiti, rather than American corporations. All in the name of “democratic promotion” and “democratic exceptionalism”. Clinton, Bush II and Cheney and Rumsford particularly stand out as shining examples in these two American values.
    We owe Haiti, big time!!

  • nflfoghorn

    Thank you, Fitty (19.10). I know this is America and you can say pretty much what you want, but how can anyone justify what Flush and PR said about Haiti and our leaders’ actions toward it? Does everything tea-baggers see go thru some kind of machine of conspiracy?

  • newfreedomblog

    @53_3 comment 19.10
    .
    I found this an interesting explanation of “extremists”, or those we think of as extreme.
    .

    “Both the liberal and conservative camps harbor extremists who favor revolutionary changes. Liberal extremists are often called radicals while conservative extremists are often referred to as reactionaries. Extremists push an agenda that makes the majority of people, regardless of their beliefs, uncomfortable. Often, the actions of extremist groups push through social or legal barriers. Some extremists engage in unlawful activity—such as the destruction of private property— in order to further their agenda and garner media attention for their cause. Many resort to violence.

    The liberal extremist Theodore Kaczynski killed three people and injured twenty-three during an eighteen-year period in the 1980s and 1990s. The Unabomber—as Kaczynski is called—sent bombs through the mail to people he considered enemies of the Earth. One of the Unabomber’s victims was Gilbert Murray, president of the California Forestry As- sociation, a timber industry group. Kaczynski believed that Murray and the timber industry were contributing to the destruction of the environment. Another victim, Thomas Mosser, an advertising executive, was falsely accused by the Unabomber of helping Exxon clean up its public image after the disastrous Exxon Valdez oil spill in March 1989. In Kaczynski’s manifesto, he advocates a revolution whose object “will be to overthrow not governments but the economic and technological basis for the present society.” Many analysts like Ralph R. Reiland argue that Kaczynski took the ideas of environmental groups such as Earth First! and pushed them to the extreme. Far left radicals like Kaczynski, he notes, take the ideas of other extremists and violently act on them. Reiland writes: “In short, the Unabomber was no intellectual loner.”

    Leftist radicals are by no means the only extremists who promote violence, however. Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, two right-wing extremists associated with the militia movement, were convicted of blowing up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City in April 1995, killing 168 people in the process. McVeigh and Nichols—like others from the militia movement—mistrust government just as Kaczynski does, but for very different reasons. Militia members assert that the government conspires to deprive people of their constitutional rights. Those involved in the militia movement contend that it is necessary to maintain a body of armed citizens and a stockpile of weapons in order to defend the people against a tyrannical government. In addition, many within the movement believe that the government protects minorities at the expense of white males. According to John M. Swomley, president of Americans for Religious Liberty, militias “are anti-abortion, anti-homosexual, and tend to accept fundamentalist white-supremacist and anti-Semitic theology as well as the subordination of women.”

    As the above examples illustrate, left and right wing extremists— while holding antithetical views—often arrive at similar solutions to perceived problems. Both Kaczynski and McVeigh mistrusted government, for instance, and both used bombs as a means of challenging the status quo. The straight line that illustrates the political spectrum, in fact, often turns into a circle with extremists from the right and left occupying the same position. While the Unabomber did not go so far as to call for the abolition of government, other extremists on the left do. Anarchists, for example, believe that government is oppressive and always undesirable. They advocate a state ruled by no political authority. In this regard they are in agreement with those from the militia movement. However, while the aim of anarchists is to turn over the means of production to the workers in order to achieve an egalitarian society, many of those in the militia movement desire a return to the days when white men had more authority and control.

    Some commentators argue that extremist views—but not extremist actions—such as those held by Kaczynski and McVeigh can benefit society by acting as a catalyst for change. For example, Marc E. Fisher, a political and religious analyst, contends that Jesus Christ was considered an extremist in his time. Fisher argues that Christ’s doctrines of brotherly love and forgiveness, however, “began a movement that would eventually change the lives of millions, indeed billions, of people” for the good. Many detractors also considered 1960s civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. an extremist. King turned that label around, asking those who would maintain racial segregation: “Will we be extremists for hate or for love? Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice or for the extension of justice?”

    Neither Jesus nor King advocated violence. However, many would argue that extremist ideas—while perhaps stimulating— inevitably lead to violent and hateful actions. For example, while members of the environmental group Earth First! do not publicly endorse violence, some commentators contend that individuals like Theodore Kaczynski nevertheless feel encouraged by the group’s ideas to commit violent acts. And while not everyone in the militia movement advocates the bombing of federal buildings, Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols evidently felt that the ideas espoused by militia groups justified the bombing that killed scores of people. At their worst, extreme ideas can lead to the deaths of vast numbers of people, as witnessed by the millions killed in World War II as a result of the hatred spewed by Adolf Hitler.”

    .
    http://www.enotes.com/extremist-groups-article
    .
    I am sure you abhor what Theodore Kaczynski did just as much as I abhor what Timothy McVeigh and his group also did.
    .
    But, to equate all conservatives as “Timothy McVeigh-like”, is simply unfair, stupid and creates a further divide in any discussions between those of us who are trying to make change happen.
    .
    While we differ greatly on many things. One thing I am sure of that you or I will not resort to some type of violent confrontation in order to prove our point as both McVeigh and Kaczynski both did.
    .
    Rush Limbaugh is nothing short of an entertainer. A radio personality who is nothing different than Jon Stewart or other comedians who perpetuate a snarky joke which people respond to.
    .
    So far as Pat Robertson is concerned, I believe Alzheimer’s has set in (my opinion), an perpetuated the more delusional aspects of his mind with regards to God, and the potential retribution of God on Man. People will see through his statements, and they may think it’s God’s actions, but quickly realize that is not true. But, there are many people who will accept it, and I am not one to sit back and say they are crazy for doing so, I have witnessed unexplained miracles, believe in God and will never say it is not possible. Not in this lifetime.
    .
    As you will never be able to be held accountable for the actions and statements of people like Sheehan, the Code Pinks, and other various left loons, nor can I be held responsible for the likes of Pat Robertson or Rush Limbaugh. That is what America is all about. The diversity of opinions. Which is what also makes this such a great country to live in. The freedom to speak out. If I do not do it in a way that is sane and rational, my time up on the soap-box will be short, as eventually rational people will prevail and I will no longer have an audience.
    .
    But, I do appreciate your civil as well as insightful comment.

  • 3xfire3

    omgamike, Not our policies. Haiti politicians and dictators managed to make Haiti what it is today. Why do liberals aways blame America for all the problems in the world. I thought we left you people back in Europe when freedom loving people immigrated to the New World. How did you sneak into our good and noble country? Go back to Europe where you belong.

  • 3xfire3

    newfreedom, You are very logical and open minded. I hope you don’t get discouraged and continue to post on this website. I’m a 71 year old moderate conservative and Navy Veteran and share you views and analysis. Few of the mostly liberals on this website ever post rational comments. Most of what they say is hateful and illustrates how closed their minds really are.
    It will be interesting to see their comments to your very thoughtful and correct analysis.
    Stz is the most rational and opened minded of the liberals. 53, Grape and Dee are extreme left wingers and are totally hopeless.

  • omgamike

    Quoting Noam Chomsky’s “Failed States”, page 154:

    “One of the closest observers of Haiti, Amy Wilentz, wrote that USAID’s huge “Democracy Enhancement” project was “specifically designed to fund those sectors of the Haitian political spectrum where opposition to the Aristide government could be encouraged.” Other US policy choices were also directed to containing the threat of democracy that had made the wrong decisions. When a military coup took place a few months later, the Organization of American States imposed an embargo. Bush I announced that he would violate it, exempting US firms. Under Clinton, trade increased still further. Bust and particularly Clinton also authorized the Texaco oil company to supply the miliary junta and its wealthy supporters with oil in violation of presidential directives, thus rendering the OAS blockade almost entirely meaningless.

    After three years of horrendous state terror, Clinton allowed the elected president to return, but on a crucial condition; that he adopt the program of the defeated US candidate in the 1990 election. As predicted at once, the harsh neoliberal programs dismantled what was left of economic sovereignty and drove the country into chaos and violence, accelerated by Bush’s banning of international aid on cynical grounds. In February 2004, with French support, the United States spirited Aristide out of the country, which fell back into the hands of the traditional predators, including elements of the army that Aristide had disbanded. Nine months later, investigations by University of Miami School of Law found that “many Haitians, especially those living in poor neighborhoods, now struggle against inhuman horror. Nightmarish fear now accompanies Haiti’s poorest in their struggle to survive in destitution [in] a cycle of violence [fueled by] Haiti’s security and justice institutions.”

    Endquote

    And our government did the same type of things in Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, etc., etc.

    So, patriotic as I am sure you are, you need to get your facts straight before implying that people don’t know what they’re talking about.

  • omgamike

    First, as I have said before, I am neither dem nor repub. But I am a little of both. I do not believe in high taxes, but do believe that taxes are a necessary evil, in order to have a compassionate society that serves the least of us. I personally do not believe in abortion, but I do believe in a woman’s right to choose and that government should stay out of our bedrooms. I am not a fan of excessive regulations and laws, but do firmly believe that big business does not respond voluntarily to call to behave. Regulations and laws are the only thing that will tame them.

    Now, I am in full agreement with the extremist arguments. But, as much as I love my country and democracy, I feel it is the responsibility and obligation of all citizens to call out our government when they are misbehaving. I am patriotic, but am incensed with patriots who go through all their lives wearing blinders, refusing to accept reality when it slaps them in their face.

    Bush II led us into a war based on lies. “Democratic Promotion” at it’s finest. Thousands of lives, innocent lives, have been lost as a result. When the WMD argument failed, then it was changed to our pushing for democracy. But it had to be a democracy that catered to what we wanted. We have occupied, and continue to occupy, a country where we are not wanted. A supermajority of Iraqi’s want us to go home. And conducting a war, with no thought, ever (by either Bush II nor Obama), as to how to pay for it, has decimated our economy. And, for Afghanistan, we have failed to learn the lessons that the Soviets learned the hard way. Afghanistan was the Viet Nam for the Soviets. And it apparently is, also, for America.

    We need to conduct a foreign policy that respects the wishes and needs and sovereignty of other countries. The best way to convey the values of democracy, is by example. Our examples have truly been wrong.

    We need to turn all of our efforts, as well as our direction, inwards, to the wishes and needs of our own people.

  • 53_3

    What you say is actually true, newfreedomblog, but there is one major problem.
    .
    Before addressing it, the Unabomber gets my condemnation as I would any other hateful killer on either side. I have absolutely no problem addressing killers on either side. All, both left and right wing, are terrorists. And are so by the very definition of terrorism.
    .
    However, even though free speech is to be treasured, there is also an old adage that goes along with it.
    .
    “With every right comes responsibility”.
    .
    This is the crux of the problem. I don’t even want to suppress Pat Robertson’s right to speak freely, nor do I want Rush Limbaugh’s rights to be abridged. However, if they say such hateful things, it is mine, and everyone elses’ right to speak out against it.
    .
    At the very core, though, and I have posted this before:
    .
    Rush Limbaugh is not just an “entertainer”. He said so himself when he claimed the mantle as “leader of the conservative movement”. Regardless of the claim, Rush Limbaugh is also a kingmaker in the GOP. In addition, he claimed the mantle of the GOP, later claiming that it was “ladled on him” when the water got too hot. That is a cop-out to avoid responsibility for hateful speech.
    .
    The perception of endemic hate in the GOP is not helped by the dogwhistled worship of TV in the Tea Party, nor is it helped by this incident. Nor is it helped by Rush Limbaugh’s racist commentary. Note that two weeks ago, he was pushing the Black man/White woman fear paradigm with Tiger Woods.
    .
    I won’t get into an argument about what/whether/if you perceive his commentary to be racist,because neither your opinion nor mine is important. The fact is that these widely publicized peers in the GOP are making life difficult for other conservatives who don’t feel that way.
    .
    The problems are not that “we”, or those in the Black community perceive them that way, the problem is that these peers of your continually feed that perception.
    .
    I am aware that there are many conservatives who don’t reel that way, but unless the conservatives work to get them to stop broadcasting such views, then prepare to be stuck with that perception.
    .
    Like I’ve said, speech, even free speech, has consequences, and one of those consequences is that you bring on yourselves those labels.
    .
    They are not our fault.

  • 53_3

    Very true.
    .
    On thing, in response to the ills that have afflicted Haiti in the past is this:
    .
    Just like the so-called ills of New Orleans, I consider that in this context that in no way is this grounds for withholding aid, and as such, is nothing more than another attempt to promote the hatred of a population that has become a victim of nature.
    .
    I saw it with Katrina, and shamefully, I’m seeing it here.
    .
    Sadly, conservatives are only hurting themselves by promoting such ill. We are not to blame for the perceptions that they are tarred with.
    .
    They must fix it themselves!

  • 3xfire3

    53, I’m not a fan of Rush Limbaugh but I believe people like Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews and many others on the left are just as bad as Rush. I have noticed that often people on the left take things out of context on what he has said. Also many of his detractors appear to take comments by others claiming they are his comments about things he is supposed to have said which may or may not be true.
    53 you know that comments made by one’s opponents about what a person has said is seldom accurate.
    Why do left wing people like Olbermann ect always get a free pass from the left?

  • omgamike

    3xfire3 – Where it concerns Olbermann and Maddow — having watched both their programs on a semi-routine basis, I can say with a high degree of confidence, that both of them have a pattern of backing up whatever claims they make, with (usually) video of the person actually making the statement. And that is usually followed up by a commentary from those in whatever field is pertinent for the segment.

    That is the main reason I do not watch any of the Fox news programs. There are countless instances where their people have made statements or comments that are proven to be 100% incorrect.

    Though I have the occasional disagreement with MSNBC’s people, I have found that more often than not, they are right on the ball. When Rachel Maddow makes a statement that turns out to be incorrect, she admits it and restates the issue correctly. (Her “misinformation” segment).

    I used to regularly watch CNN, especially Lou Dobbs — but then he went over the edge and started making more rants than reasonable arguments. His arguments were specious.

    I have no idea of whether Limbaugh is a racist. Many of his statements are racist. But, he could be making them as part of a program meant to create strong reactions, as a form of entertainment. But, even if you assume he is not a racist, those types of comments are uncalled for, especially as entertainment.

    I would equally condemn similar statements from any of MSNBC’s or CNN’s people and/or programs.

    And there are way too many members of the GOP who have equally outrageous statements, as well as a few people in the democratic side of the aisle. Again, neither side has an inherent right to try and inflame people’s passions through racist and/or hate speech.

  • sacredh

    “I’m pretty much reduced to one-liners…”
    .
    Ouch.

  • http://millennialcivis.wordpress.com/2010/01/15/the-news-i-read-today/ The News I Read Today « Millennial Civis

    [...] I find myself disagreeing more and more with the President on certain policy proposals. However, I have yet to doubt his leadership. Besides, the President is the executor of the laws, not the legislator. If only we would all stop [...]

  • http://obamasocialnetwork.com/morning-news-47/ Obama Social Network » Morning News

    [...] Time Magazine: A White House aide tells me that President Obama issued a clear order Tuesday night, just before 6 p.m., when his national security aide Denis McDonough told him there had been an earthquake in Haiti: He told McDonough that he wanted an aggressive and highly coordinated response. [...]

  • 3xfire3

    omgamike, Your post sounds like one I would post except I would be saying the same thing about FOX and coservatives as you are saying about MSNBC and Democrats.
    Are views are probably formed by which network we choose to watch and our own belief sysytems. Real truth in somewhere in between. The difference I usually find with liberals is that they are usually too closed minded to understand this point.

blog comments powered by Disqus