On Governing All The Time

Was there at least 24 hours between the time that Obama made his first statement, and then the 2nd?
.
I am losing touch with as many times we have seen this guy on camera, perhaps we should just count the number of days he has not been campaigning. I’ll take a shot at 5.
.
The Community-Organizer-in-Chief transitions to The Campaigner-in-Chief.

Goodness gracious, Michael, this might be the stupidest darn thing you’ve ever posted.
-
The GOP has been obstructing, not even making a vague attempt at governing, since about 45 seconds after Pres. Obama was sworn in. That is the meaning of the first quote.
-
Now that we are in campaign season, the president is also campaigning. That is what’s going on in that second quote. (And if it’s not campaign season, then stop posting about campaigns instead of substantive issues around here).
-
And reasonably intelligent 12-year-old who follows politics knows that this is what’s going on here. Why are you pretending to be so stupid?

So answering the arguments made by your political opposition isn’t part of governing? I think you have a weird view of how the government works, Michael. This is the lamest “gotcha” I’ve seen in a long time (and usually I like a good gotcha.)

Personally, I wish the “gotcha media” would stop. Why can’t we try for just a little while to stick to important issues. I can understand it, though. If it weren’t for the “gotcha” moments, Sarah Palin would be forgotten.

Can someone translate for me? I forgot my Scherer-ese to English Dictionary at work.

@erieangel: There can be serious gotcha stories though — things that expose true hypocrisies. This is just silly.

See, Obama says he’s all about governing, which is like signing bills and appointing blue ribbon panels and doing diplomatic meetings and flying on Air Force 1. But Scherer caught him arguing in public with a politician who disagrees with the president’s agenda. Since that doesn’t fall into the categories of signing bills, appointing blue ribbon panels, doing diplomatic meetings or flying on Air Force 1, Scherer thinks it’s campaigning.

I could pull earlier jabs too. My point is only that whenever a politician tells you he is not playing politics, but his opponents are, it is usually because that politician is actively playing politics, which is the case here.

Are you sure that there’s not some sort of ironic twist to this? Because Michael loves nothing more than a good dose of irony.

Wow.. A profound and earth-shattering blog post from MS.
.
Note: Pl switch on your sarcasm detection meters.

Yes, politicians “play politics.” It’s right there in the name.
-
Now, there used to be these things, called “journamalists” or something, who would help us evaluate the truth or falsity of the statements the politicians make.
-
This is the most obstructionist minority in the history of the US Senate, is it not?
-
During the health care reform debate, we got cries of fascism and socialism from the GOP in opposing policies they themselves had supported a few months earlier, did they not?
-
I genuinely don’t believe you that you think your job is to “point out when politicians are playing politics.” Why would anyone pay money in exchange for that service?

@michaelscherer: No, it was two opposing politicians arguing a position. That is part of governance in our system. Don’t dig in, you got this one wrong!

MS, Please come out of the closet and declare that you are a Republican shill.
.
It is going to be a very liberating experience, you know. Dont believe me?? Ask the folks at Flox news.
.
Also, I urge Time.com to suspend its DADT policy on the political leanings of its reporters.
.

Was there at least 24 hours between the time that Obama made his first statement, and then the 2nd?
–
Let’s see … the first statement was made July 29, 2010 and the second statement was made June 30, 2010 … so, yes, it seems there was at least 24 hours, and more like 720 hours, between the two statements.
–
This is idiotic even for you.

Michael, I totally agree with Elvis and destor23. This is a “gotcha” post that is kind of lame, something I would not be normally surprised to see except that it is coming from you. You generally put more thought and care into your posts.

You want to know what it really means to politicize an issue? It’s when you oppose a good policy out of fear that if you don’t, you will lose and the other side will win (i.e., Health Care.) The GOP began opposing many of its own ideas in the health care debate as soon as they realized Obama liked and was serious about incorporating those ideas. That, my friend, is politicizing. Using what the opposing side says against them in a way that reflects their view and isn’t taken out of context is not politicizing, and if it is, it’s in a gray area where I can give them the benefit of the doubt. The fact that Obama flattered the locals into thinking he cares for them and the GOP doesn’t is in a gray area where it is not done purely for political purpose but to support what he believes would make a strong policy. In this case, the extent of politicization is so small that if this is what counts as politicizing then I can think of very few times when politicians are not politicizing. And if that is your point then it defeats the purpose of this post.

Can’t quite understand how this can be called the stupidest thing Scherer has ever written. He didn’t really write anything. All he did was post two quotes by the president.

Don’t shoot the messenger.

MS seems to forget that by any objective measure Obama has an exceedingly long string of legislative successes under his belt. I know he’d lose a snark opportunity if he were to acknowlege that but the last 20 months have indeed seen a sharp contrast between Obama and the Minority caucus when it comes to governing vs campaigning.

Oh my, Michael, you have upset the liberals. Anything written about Obama that isn’t fawning and adoring, simply does NOT meet their journalistic standards. The pollsters are all stupid and lying if the numbers show the public as not being happy with his performance. A 43% approval rating and 61% thinking the country is headed in the wrong direction, simply does not register with them. Shape up or ship out, Michael, the left has NO tolerance for honest reporting!

Scherer isn’t a GOP shill.

You make good points, Elvis Elvisberg.

What makes you think Mr Scherer is pretending?

Well.. he is either a shill or he is trying very hard to look like a stupid hack.
.
Whatever, he certainly does grasp at the the flimsiest of opportunities for a snark at President Obama.
.
And I have caught him showering praise on President grumpy old man John “about turn” McCain, when he least deserved it.

Here is my try, for what it’s worth:
.
June 30, 2010: Obama campaigns for the passage of the Finance Reform bill.
.
July 29, 2010: On the View, Obama was bemoaning the fact that he actually has to campaign to get stuff done.
.
No inconsistencies that I can see. I was worried that the crackhead right was going to pick him to death on a few f his other very minor “potential” gaffes*.
.
*Not really gaffes, but they had enough meat to ‘em that they could be spun that way.

And Obama wonders why his numbers are falling.

“We shouldn’t be campaigning all the time. You know there is a time to campaign, and then there is a time to govern. And what we have tried to do over the last 20 months is to govern.”

Err… where is the “gotcha?” It would be a gotcha if he said that he hasn’t been campaigning. The fact of the matter is that you clearly have to do campaigning to get anything done with this present political climate, which is not contradictory at all with the financial reform statement.

But this is all besides the larger irony of you bringing up this “discrepancy” when you yourself write posts like this one yesterday (link):

In a new paper, two well-respected economists, Alan Binder and Mark Zandi, try to estimate exactly how much worse the economic crisis would have been without various government interventions. They find that “government’s total policy response” prevented the nation from lapsing into a new Great Depression, preventing an additional drop of 6.5 percent to GDP, the loss of another 8.5 million jobs and a nation that would be experiencing deflation, a scary financial spiral in which the best thing to do with your money would be to stuff it in a mattress.

[...]

Politically, these estimations are unlikely to matter much. The government programs all remain very unpopular. People don’t feel they have benefited even as they have. Which raises another issue with the transactional nature of our political process. It doesn’t work like a candy store in which you hand over a concrete thing of value (money) for a concrete thing of value (candy). More often than not, people are offering their vote for something intangible, like “hope,” for instance. As long as Americans perceive that the Obama administration’s response has not helped them, that may be all that matters.

How are you defining governance in this sort of context? Is governance just doing financial reform and leaving it at that, not even attempting to explain to a very stupid constituency that, yes, a vaccine is worth the pain of the needle? Is governance letting financial reform die on the Senate table while the American public it is designed to protect is fed lies? Or is governance doing what is right for the country, whatever that may entail?

June 10th 2009 BHO “Good morning”
.
July 3rd 2010 BHO “Good evening”
.
Man that guy is such a hypocrite!

Well this is totally untrue. In all cases of legislation passed over the past year or so, Obama has completely ignored the will of the people.
.
Healthcare Reform – Marjoity 53% DISAPPROVE, 32% Approve, 15% “Don’t know”.
.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20001700-503544.html

Which morning was gooder, Mr. President? Which?

Support for the building of a fence along the Mexican border has reached a new high, and voters are more confident than ever that illegal immigration can be stopped.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 68% of U.S. voters now believe the United States should continue to build a fence on the Mexican border. That’s up nine points from March when the Obama administration halted funding for the fence and the highest level of support ever.

Just 21% oppose the continued building of the border fence.
.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/immigration/support_for_mexican_border_fence_up_to_68
.
This President instead sue’s AZ. Doesn’t make sense.

Twenty-eight percent (28%) of Likely Voters say the country is heading in the right direction, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey taken the week ending Sunday, July 25.

This is up one point from last week but remains within the narrow range found on this question since last July.

Following Congress’ passage of the national health care bill in late March, the number of voters who said the country was heading in the right direction peaked at 35%, the highest level of optimism measured since early September 2009. But it has since returned to the levels found prior to passage of the bill.
.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/right_direction_or_wrong_track
.
I rest my case your Honor.

Sarcasm?

I guess when you get caught with your pants down around your ankles as happened to Michael and Joe with the Journolist scandal, you have to do a little “reporting”. Something totally harmless to this President. That is why you see this post. Yea it is a slight jab at Obama, but all Americans know that Politicians are in continuous campaign mode. It has been that way for over a 100 years now.
.
Don’t let Michael however let you believe this is in anyway negative about this President. If Michael was truly a changed man, had given up his mantle he has carried for this Administration since day one of the 2008 election cycle, you would see truthful journalism on how the country at large is now totally against the vast majority of Obama’s policy plans.
.
But, no, we get some fluff article questioning if Obama is in campaign mode or if he is truly governing.
.
The only way we as voters can turn Obama back on his hell bent path for destroying this nation is by confronting Obama ourselves. The lame stream media Scherer represents is totally in the bag with Obama. Scherer also has to protect his spot in the White House Press Room. I think he wants Helen Thomas’ old seat.

Honest? What’s honest about copying/posting two random unrelated quotes?
.
Scherer, really, this is an embarrassment even for you. You are a waste of space and salary. Please, get off your behind and go do some actual reporting, even if it’s not favorable to Obama. But come up with something real, not the bs you pass off as journalism. There are stories out there if you make even half an effort. Regurgitating other reporters’ stories and quotes really is a lazy way out.

Healthcare Reform – Marjoity [sic] 53% DISAPPROVE, 32% Approve, 15% “Don’t know”.
.
.
Oh, this little nugget:
“The [CBS] poll, conducted March 29 through April 1…”
.
‘Way to Breitbart a poll, dumb****.

Well this is totally untrue. In all cases of legislation passed over the past year or so, Obama has completely ignored the will of the people.

rustyblogwhore you are without a doubt an ignorant and disingenuous jackass. A poll from April 2nd? Yeah, that’s still relevant. Approval for HCR is at 50% currently with disapproval at 35%. Approval has been rising since it was passed. Nice attempt to skew the facts to support your ridiculous position.
..
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/29/AR2010072900004.html?hpid=topnews

Twenty-eight percent (28%) of Likely Voters say the country is heading in the right direction, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey taken the week ending Sunday, July 25.

Again you choose the outlier otherwise known as the Repub polling firm, Rassmussen. Try using someone less biased next time.
..
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/direction_of_country-902.html

00:00:01, Jan 1, 2010: Happy New Year!
00:00:01, Jan 1, 2011: Happy New Year!
.
Oh, wait.
.
He hasn’t done that one yet. But watch out.
.
You know he will…

Actually, Micheal, it’s even more hideous:
.
Within moments after saying that, after Elizabeth addressed to him a question in an angry tone of voice*, he promptly switched to campaign mode to tout his long list of accomplishments.
.
The hideous horror! The sheer presumptuousness! The Spittle!
.
The, the, ultimate gotcha-ishness…
.
*Where’s the outrage there Micheal? I guess the domestic help aren’t the only people it’s ok to address like that, huh?

If telling it like it is and arguing with logic is campaigning, (as cited with that second quote), then I’d be all for campaigning all the time. Go President Obama! Campaign away.

Rusty and Freep think it’s a liberal plot to take over American Greetings

nflfoghorn- clueless party of one

Awww, the bite of the sarcasm dog hurts, doesn’t it poor Rusty? Ow.

Obama: Here is some campaign rhetoric.

Scherer: Gotcha! You said there is a time to campaign and a time to govern.

Obama: Yes, and as the Congressional midterm elections approach, now is the time to campaign. And campaigning includes honestly pointing out the different views between the parties, so that voters can make an informed choice.

Scherer: Yes, but that was a “jab”!

Obama: If a voter is upset at the state of economy and wants to vote for the party that will extend unemployment benefits, pass a small-business stimulus bill, and actively create economic growth through fiscal stimulus, shouldn’t I be allowed to tell the voter which party is which? If one party thinks financial reform is a huge issue and one thinks it is a problem as small as an ant, shouldn’t I be allowed to tell the voters which party is which?*

Scherer: [embarassed] Um, yeah, I guess…. But I have some other jabs you made too…. somewhere… I think.

*An intelligent criticism of Obama, which Scherer was incapable of making, is that Obama’s White House was opposed to the broadest FinReg changes, wanted to tinker around the margins, and otherwise treated the problems on Wall Street like ants.

Oh here you go little Ladydiecash. A total of all polling for healthcare.
.
RCP Averages
.
Approve: 38.3 %
.
Disapprove: 50.5 %
.
What did you say again? Oh and this is as of 7/11/10.
.
I understand your frustration I truly do. You just shouldn’t make up lies however, it simply makes you an even bigger fool than you already are my friend.
.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html

BTW, wasn’t someone on Swampland soliciting suggestions for stupidest story ever? I have a nomination!

Yeah, I don’t think he’s pretending either. Have you read his work here?

I think Michael should go further and give us a full accounting of the governance time of the Obama and Bush presidencies:
.
Number of Hours in Office
(minus time spent:)
- shaking hands
- kissing babies
- looking for WMD (oh, wait, that’s governing)
- posing for photos
- flying over Gulf / Louisiana
- on vacation
- Drinking Beer / Mountain Biking
—————————————-
== Total Time Spent Governing
.
Go for it, Michael! Please. Or…just go.

Just peddling hate. Wonderful it is what America needs now.

Kbang —
You forgot “time spent clearing brush”.

Way to Breitbart a poll

foghorn, I like … I think we should turn the name Breitbart to a verb.

MS is probably trying to rile you all hope, and from the number of postings in such a short while, he seems to have succeeded.
.
Quotes in his own original post like shouldn’t and tried to do over the last 20 months make complete nonsense of the suggestion that the president was trying to say he does not campaign. There must be something to getting a lot of responses for your posts. Maybe these folks get better pay for it, maybe it makes them feel less lonely …. whatever the motivation, it is important enough to MS that he is willing to pay the price of being really silly.
.
And this is neither a liberal or conservative stance, it is simply pointing out the complete stupidity of the post, which should be obvious to all, in spite of your political persuasion.

that’s “rile you up”, not “rile you hope” …. it is friday, and I am already giddy with the thot of what would/could happen tonite

“The Community-Organizer-in-Chief transitions to The Campaigner-in-Chief.”
.
Based on your previous statements, don’t you mean, “Anti-Christ in Chief”?

You know, I was just thinking, after watching the Republican Party effectively shut down the government with unprecedented and unprincipled obstruction and the cable channel which is the only source of information trusted religiously by millions of Americans race-bait and try to stoke white resentment towards our first African-American president, the problem is that Barack Obama campaigns too much.

Seconded.

Mostly, yes.

It makes sense. Did you watch how Elizabeth addressed the POTUS?
.
It’s odd that her tone of address is considered so unexceptional as to garner no comment whatsoever…

I will also say that her conduct isn’t a big thing. Its just very disrespectful, which must be the new normal…

At the risk of defending Michael Scherer, I think his point was less aiming a “Gotcha!” at Obama than it was suggesting that it is now virtually impossible to “govern” as opposed to campaign. Partly due to the unceasing news cycle (of which, alas, Scherer is very much apart) and more due to the fact that the Republicans never stopped campaiging for so much as a day, and have dropped all pretense of doing anything that could be accused of governing, the Obama statement on “The View” actually has a kind of wistful quality.

But the most important element of this thread is clearly the coining of the word “Breitbart” as a verb. As luck would have it, I had the opportunity to meet the man for the first time last week and he is every bit as twisted as you might expect. I think it is important to clear about our terms and that, nflfoghorn, as the apparent creator, you should take a moment to define a little further what it means to “breitbart” something. It seems to have potential as a low order word for “to directly mislead” but you should feel free to further elucidate before it gets out into public discourse.

By next week, one could actually write, with a straight face, “I hereby refudiate your attempt to Breitbart that edited video” and have it merit an adequate degree of truthiness.

And your point here is ???????????

I see no connection from the first paragraph to the second…should Obama just keep his mouth shut and NOT fight for things he believes in?

Major Micheal Fail here….

“My point is only that whenever a politician tells you he is not playing politics, but his opponents are, it is usually because that politician is actively playing politics…”

That’s a point you think needs to be made?

“At the risk of defending Michael Scherer, I think his point was less aiming a “Gotcha!” at Obama than it was suggesting that it is now virtually impossible to “govern” as opposed to campaign.”
.
Nope. You’re projecting an actual worthwhile political observation on Scherer. This was his actual “insight”:

My point is only that whenever a politician tells you he is not playing politics, but his opponents are, it is usually because that politician is actively playing politics, which is the case here.

You see, when Obama says, “[w]e shouldn’t be campaigning all the time…[y]ou know there is a time to campaign, and then there is a time to govern…[a]nd what we have tried to do over the last 20 months is to govern…,” what Scherer hears is Obama saying “he is not playing politics” (like, ever) which sounds hypocritical or dishonest (or something) to him. That’s what struck him and what he thought important enough to share with his readers. But I can see why you found it so hard to believe.

I think this will pass as a unanimous choice, if not for the filibuster from Rustydog, freepee and Dr Earl in a jar.
.
MS, You have plenty of supporters here.. among the wingnuts. I guess it is a badge of honour for you!!

MS: The President said he shouldn’t have to campaign all the time. You seem to imply, even in your headline, that that means he should govern all the time, and campaign none of the time. That’s poor logic. Of course a president has to campaign. Mr. Obama was stating that he has tried to govern as much as possible during his time in office. But it is part of his job to campaign some of the time.

There is another political entity, however, which has shown little or no appetite for governing. That’s a shame; it’s part of their job description, too.