Why Barack Obama Doesn’t Like To Chit Chat With His Press Corps

Barack Obama’s first public statement on the mosque plans near New York’s Ground Zero was perfectly scripted from a communications perspective. It was timed for a Friday night, the weekly news cycle’s black hole. He spoke before a Muslim audience at a dinner celebrating Ramadan. His statement was carefully scripted, and focused both on recognizing the continuing pain of September 11 and the American tradition of religious freedom.

Then came Saturday. The president wasn’t supposed to address the mosque again. But he did have to walk by his press pool on his way to lunch with his family. He was joking around. He looked to be in a good mood. A reporter asked a stray question, and Obama blew all the careful planning of his staff. He varied from his initial remarks, creating a new narrative for a story the White House does not want to linger. Was he adding an asterisk to his remarks, as the Washington Post put it? Was it a recalibration, as the New York Times put it? In short, this is a communications disaster. The White House had to release a statement clarifying the new statement, or restatement, or whatever. The president’s opponents, who had been pushing the mosque issue for weeks as a way to get Democrats on the wrong side of the polls in an election year, came out celebrating. Liz Cheney, who can diminish just about any nuanced thought into a barbed cable news talking point, emailed Politico’s Mike Allen from her iPhone. “I guess President Obama was for the mosque before he was against it. You can quote me,” went the message.

Now everyone is riled up. The story will stay in the political bloodstream for another day or three. And President Obama has another reason not to talk to his press corps on the record. As a rule, Obama avoids much interaction with those who follow him on a day to day basis. He will have reporters and columnists over for the occasional off-the-record lunch, but the daily chit chat is kept to a minimum. In this way, he distinguishes himself from Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, two more natural schmoozers. But Saturday’s gaffe represents the second time this year that an unscheduled chit chat with the press corps caused him big problems. In late April, he came to the back of Air Force One and said “there may not be appetite” for immigration reform, an admission dubbed by one reporter Obama’s “fatal flinch” that infuriated Senate leaders and Hispanic voters, and effectively ended any hope for the bill passing this year.

Obama’s hesitance for impromptu moments with reporters is bad for people like me. And it may, in some ways, be bad for democracy, as voters are denied the opportunity to see their leader without a script. But Obama is by no means the first person to realize the dangers of talking off the cuff with reporters. John McCain can tell you.

Related Topics: Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Audacity of Dope: Tales of a Toking Teenage Obama

    We knew Barack Obama smoked weed in high school because he wrote about it in his books. What we didn’t know until Buzzfeed posted these choice nuggets (I’m so sorry) from David Maraniss’s new book on the President’s younger years, is the giggle-worthy details of his “Choom Gang” lifestyle, which are right out of a buddy stoner flick. Obama and his friends drove around the lush Hawaii countryside, hot-boxing their VW bus and re-upping with a long-haired pizza-tossing dealer named Ray, who Obama thanked in his yearbook “for all the good times.”

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    Obama Stumbles? Why the President’s Right to Talk About Bain

    The meme of the day in journo-world is that President Obama has stumbled at the outset of the general election campaign. The evidence for this? Well, uh, there isn’t very much, really–except that a few Democrats have criticized his campaign’s attacks on Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital and that Obama’s fundraising is merely humongous, instead of obscenely humongous. The two phenomena are linked, of course: Obama isn’t getting the usual haul from Wall Street because he has outrageously–outrageously!–tried to regulate the bankers who did so much to crash the economy in 2008. The handful of Democrats squawking are people who either (a) get money from private equity firms or (b) have retired and joined Mondo Casino. But there is another side to this story:

  • georgepeng

    A tad disingenuous, isn’t it?

    I mean, if the press can’t or won’t recognize nuance and jumps on any stray word as the beginning or digression from some imaginary narrative, then of course he won’t speak to the press in impromptu fashion, because simply put, the press hasn’t shown itself capable or willing to engage with depth, rather than with the goal of putting blood in the water.

    It’s one thing to report the “facts”. It’s wholly another to spend the time to divine the truth behind the facts. And frankly, the press is too interested in throwing chum to the likes of Liz Cheney and Sarah Palin, who are qualified to do nothing more than throw rocks, than to actually figure out the subtleties and meaning of his statements.

    You reap what you sow. And if you’re going to hold yourself hostage to the 24 hour news cycle, then don’t be surprised when the people you’re subjecting to it try and strategically manage it, and you.

  • redraven937

    And it may, in some ways, be bad for democracy, as voters are denied the opportunity to see their leader without a script.

    There is nothing worse for democracy than what the media has already done to it. Instead of spending time on issues like the outrageous cost of medical care in America compared to other developed countries like Japan, there is nothing. No, worse than nothing: this garbage.

    The mosque will be built, and like the Gulf oil disaster, the media eye will move on to the next faux “gaff” or scandal. At what point did ratings supersede reporting that actually matters? You guys are becoming worse than even the Congress you report on – so focused on getting reelected (i.e. getting ratings) that you lose sight of what it means to actually govern intelligently.

    I can only hope that the same force that destroyed the newspapers eventually reaches out to vapid internet reporting.

  • mycophile

    seems like a way lot of truth in the first two comments here

  • spob

    But I thought Barack Obama could play three-level chess . . . .
    .
    The real problem, Mike, is that Obama tried to get too cute with the Ramadan speech. He gave a resounding speech in which he said less than met the eye (he also did this on the campaign trail when it came to signing statements). Then people, reacting to what they thought they heard, gave him rhetorical high-fives. And he walked back a little. And now it’s an issue. Obama played with fire, and now he’s been burned. But he is not a victim in this at all.
    .
    Obama would have been better served simply saying what he thinks–i.e., that he supports the mosque and that those who oppose it are bad guys. Instead, he tried to finesse it, and look where it got him.
    .
    Obama is fundamentally a wuss. Looks like he learned well from his law school. Check out Harvard’s wuss move on Israel.
    .
    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/08/027004.php

  • kbanginmotown

    “…voters are denied the opportunity…”
    .
    Nice use of the passive voice. Who dunnit? No one. It just happens…

  • stuartzechman

    Michael Scherer:
    .
    Now everyone is riled up. The story will stay in the political bloodstream for another day or three.
    .
    And the political press corps itself bears no culpability in this state of affairs? You’re all just molecules responding inevitably to other molecules, following the physical laws of…press corps behavior? You’re like chirping birds? Or woodpeckers?
    .
    it may, in some ways, be bad for democracy, as voters are denied the opportunity to see their leader without a script.
    .
    Are you certain it isn’t an inevitable product of the press corps’ endless willingness to be used by political operatives?
    .
    That the conversation is “driven” by the cynical, and the adversarial, and the professionally dishonest…that isn’t the reason why our democracy is routinely failed?
    .
    I have to ask, Michael Scherer:
    .
    What would you do with officials’ unscripted moments, if you had them at will?
    .
    How would the American people better be able to decide who was acting in their best interests, or which policy path to pursue?
    .
    Would we get 91,000 pages of nine years of a failed foreign adventure in the military’s own words, or would we get the Lewinsky scandal over and over again?
    .
    What’s really “bad for democracy“, the politicians and operatives, or the political press corps who work with them every day, Michael Scherer?

  • virginiagentleman

    Maybe it’s because I’ve been at the beach all weekend and away from the oh-so-serious world of political media, but I’m having a hard time seeing the problem here or the supposed “gaffe.”
    .
    The President appears to have made a strong, general statement about the vital importance of protecting religious freedom in our country. Since he was speaking to a audience largely comprised of Muslims in conjunction with a Muslim holy day, the comments were clearly directed in part to the issue of the community center in New York.
    .
    But he wasn’t limiting his comments to that center and he shouldn’t. There are ongoing protests about mosques planned in communities in Tennessee and California. And it’s not certain that the community center in New York will proceed as planned. So why should he limit his comments to one instance? It’s a national issue dealing with a core American right (of freedom of worship) and that’s how the President handled it in his comments, both on Friday and Saturday.
    .
    Why is that so confusing to the media? Who really made the gaffe here? The President or the media, running around like barely trained hounds, chasing any scent they find and barking like maniacs the whole time..

  • charlieromeobravo

    “Obama’s hesitance for impromptu moments with reporters is bad for people like me. And it may, in some ways, be bad for democracy, as voters are denied the opportunity to see their leader without a script.”

    You have know one to blame but yourselves if the people you’re covering are reluctant to speak to you in a more casual manner. If the media isn’t directly looking for someone to screw up so they can report about it then they’re relaying the statements of pundits like Liz Cheney who will spin a statement into a gaff even when it isn’t. If the media would spend more time on fact checking and providing context then someone might be wiling to speak to you guys off the cuff and not have to worry that the statement gets wildly misconstrued or willfully inaccurate interpretations are spread around with impunity.

  • http://erieangel.wordpress.com erieangel

    Sorry, but I don’t see a gaffe. What I see is the media, all sides of it, twisting the presidents words to suit their own purposes. In both instances, Obama was talking about a fundamental right in this country, that will be erased if the RWers have their way. Some of them want to stop the building of any new Mosques in this country–not just stop the one two blocks away from ground zero. That is Un-American and I’d like to know why the mainstream media isn’t drilling those guys into the ground at least half as hard as they try to drill Obama.

  • http://elvisberg.wordpress.com Elvis Elvisberg

    Obama’s hesitance for impromptu moments with reporters is bad for people like me. And it may, in some ways, be bad for democracy, as voters are denied the opportunity to see their leader without a script.
    -
    Why is that bad for democracy?
    -
    If the media reports on a clause or two from an unscripted comment– one that does not affect policy or people’s lives in the style of People magazine– then what do we lose from the absence of a firestorm over, say, “the officer behaved stupidly”?
    -
    I honestly don’t see what we lose from that story and its ilk not existing. Sure, it’s easy to write and fulminate about, but it doesn’t tell us anything about the policies the president is advocating and implementing.
    -
    And remember, the reason that we care about the government is because it implements policies that affect people’s lives.

  • gadsbys

    A few words spun many ways. You guys are lucky he talks to you at all.

    Me? I’d be happy with a few fireside chats.

    Maybe every 60 days or so. With no talking / yacking heads to tell me what I just heard. I think I am smart enough to understand the English language.

  • maverick2k9

    Ohh.. please.. You are not fooling anyone with your latest pseudo-lament.
    -
    It is bad for democracy, when people like Michael Scherer give free and unquestioned airtime to incompetent, unelected quasi-poltician/publicity-whores like Liz Cheney and Sarah Palin.
    -
    It is good for democracy, when MS (and the rest of the so-called journalists) finally manage to actually interview Liz Cheney/Sarah Palin this year and get to ask the hard questions.
    -
    Till then, Real Journalism(TM) is dead and buried.

  • stuartzechman

    the reason that we care about the government is because it implements policies that affect people’s lives
    .
    Thank you.

  • apr2563

    Politico, Liz Cheney, Sarah Palin: These are the traditional presses sources.
    .
    I hope the President avoids the Village press at all costs. As someone stated earlier, you have no understanding of nuance and how to explain it. Or, you choose not to. Hyperbole is so much more sellable.
    .
    Michael, during the Clinton years the media went for the exploitive and sensational. During the Bush years they could not report the complex but venal with any consistency. Now, they are back to the superficial. That’s right. The story will last for a couple more days because you and others will keep it ginned up, just as you have in this post.
    .
    Mike Allen to RW Hugh Hewitt, hopes for a 50/50 Senate because it is could for reporters. Keep the pot stirred and that’s what he hopes for. What a CREEP!

  • apr2563

    Correction: “good” for reporters. And yes, I yelled. When you see the same cr*p reporeted daily, it makes one angry.

  • apr2563

    Here are a few proposed occupants of the new “1 World Trade Center” (sounds suspiciously socialistic doesn’t it?. The “sacred” site will include a boutique hotel that includes the Terrace Club for exclusive use by members of the business community.
    500,000 feet will be retail spots.
    China Center will include a Chinese cultural and business center occupying 190,810 square feet.
    Above the 20th floor will be office space.
    All sounds very sensitive and respectful to me. Right?

  • apr2563

    Michael: Instead of quoting Politico and Liz Cheney, please take a look at Josh Marshall and TPM. It is called in depth reporting about sources.
    http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/08/getting_some_facts_on_the_table.php?ref=fpblg

  • apr2563

    http://www.forward.com/articles/130013/
    .
    For those with closed minds and hearts, please note above article regarding Imams visiting Nazi death camps and offering prayers.

  • allthingsinaname

    And here we sit and read this trash and comment to boot! Now I am beginning to wonder why the Press does what it does. Why to gin up controversy so we keep coming back for more of the same tripe.
    .
    We are as much to blame as the press. They publish what we want. We do not want the truth, or there are enough of us who don’t that they can make money from.
    .
    Stop the press? Stop reading them, but hell I am addicted.
    .
    Just the same I agree with most of you. I am disgusted with myself however.

  • Art Pepper

    Br’er Scherer: “waah waah! Obama made me quote Liz Cheney’s e-mail to Mike Allen!”

  • mycophile

    well put. I am afraid I somewhat resemble that remark

  • powerpoultry

    Liz Cheney & Sarah Palin, or Couric & Amanpour? Most Americans would choose the former. They aren’t stuffy or boring.

  • shepherdwong

    Now let me get this straight: FOX News (the country’s largest cable news franchise) and the rest of the Republican Party are ginning-up racial and religious intolerance among vast numbers of white Americans for crass political gain and your story is: “oh nos, the President gets off-message!”
    .
    Have I got that right, Michael Scherer?

  • homerhk

    I am sorry but I have read and re-read Obama’s speech on Friday night and his “impromptu” comments on Saturday as well as Bloomberg’s oft-praised speech on this issue and maybe it’s because I speak English and understand English words but I can’t see a cigarette paper’s worth of difference between them.

    I have also read various reports about the “clarification” that Obama gave on Saturday and almost all of them quote the line “I am not commenting on the wisdom etc.” but fail to even mention the first line out of his mouth which was:

    “In this country we treat everybody equally and in accordance with the law, regardless of race, regardless of religion”

    Isn’t that the moral position that Obama and Bloomberg were taking? whether or not it is wise to do something is neither here nor there – in the US, the law applies equally to everyone. I wish I could understand – substantively – why these “impromptu” comments have been reported as weakening what he said on Friday night. That is not a rhetorical question – I sincerely want someone to explain that to me.

  • Alex Vallas

    Frankly, the press is creating much of the problems we are facing today with the polarization of the country. They jump on every utterance and give their own interpretation of what was said whether it was made by Obama or Palin. The are possessed with trying to see everything in a negative light and report accordingly. Most are inexperienced and looking for the “gotcha” moment. Pathetic. The President acted presidential and his comments were in support and defense of the Constitution of the United States and Freedom of Religion. He did not endorse or condemn the building of the Islamic Center in New York (NOT at Ground Zero but a couple of blocks away). He clearly stated that was for the citizens of NY to decide. That certainly did not make the press happy so they gave major headlines to Newt, Boozing Boehner and Birdbrain Palin who would be well advised to read The Constitution along with several other GOPers.

  • Alex Vallas

    See my comments that follow yours.

  • sevenoaks07

    apr: thanks. The Cheneys, pere est fils , to Mike Allen (Schoomzer in Chief) to Politico and then a fanning out to the usual suspects. Thanks to MS for drawing the straight line…Politico is doing what is does best: distort and misdirect.

  • sevenoaks07

    Read the Constitution? No way: they need to be able to refudiate.

  • bobell

    @kbang — First, congragulations on recognizing an actual passive when you see one. (Lest you think that’s intended to be sarcastic, check out Geoff Pullum’s recent postings on the subject at http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/ )
    .
    Anyway, if the issue is whether we know who’s making it the case that “voters are denied the opportunity,” and I think that’s clear enough from context. What’s interesting to me — and, now that I think of it, this may be your point — is the way that a member of the MSM instinctively omits them from the sentence describing the result of their conduct.
    .
    Still, it strikes me as entirely too facile to blame the media, or anyone else, for giving the people what they want instead of making them take their medicine. If people seek out fluff, they’re going to get fluff, and those who might otherwise offer them substance are going to be sorely tempted to offer more of the same fluff. Gotta flog them papers/magazines. Gotta attract those eyeballs. Gotta sell those ads.
    .
    It’s a cliche by now, but that’s because Walt Kelly said it best: We have met the enemy, and he is us.

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

    Why do I have a vision of a circling flock of Vultures lamenting the fact that some creature had the audacity to not die?

  • kevin

    They aren’t stuffy or boring.
    .
    Yes, if I were looking for clowns for a children’s party, I’d go with Cheney and Palin.
    .
    But if I were looking for news that affected my life, I’d go with an actual journalist.

  • mycophile

    in fact, I was awakened in the middle of the night by my grinding mind screaming to write a distillation of this latest (“mosque”) controversy, and posted it on Obama Qualifies @52
    .
    I need an addiction recovery counselor. Or maybe just a stiff bout of cold turkey

  • gysgt213

    “I guess President Obama was for the mosque before he was against it. You can quote me,” went the message.
    .
    Should that not read “send the message”. Because that is excatly what Mike Allen did with Liz Cheney’s message.

  • artraveler

    Great comment.

    The new Republican Bill of Rights has only 2 items-
    1. The right to have any thing that can kill anything at any time and in any way.

    2. Tax cuts really work so if we reduce taxes to zero, the country would be rolling in so much money that they would be giving it away. (Wrong-that’s Palin’s Alaska where they are running a deficit but still giving oil/gas money away). Not bad for a state which is so socialist that they get $1.82 back from the rest of us taxpayers for every $1.00 they pay in.

    The Democrats need to get their messages down to 30-second soundbites and 140 characters to meet the current attention span of the TV watcher. In depth analysis?- who really needs to think when there is some simpleton willing to distill it into 30 seconds of pablum.

  • Ivy_B

    Excellent job everyone! I had the same feelings as I listened to NPR this morning re-hashing this again.

    As homer said, I have read all of the talks and don’t see a dime’s worth of difference, but look at the “firestorm” (quoting Cokie Roberts) created by the press.

  • newfreedomblog

    Well, I do not think this will go away as soon as you think it may. Drudge has not one, but two references to the Ground Zero Mosque in their report today.
    .

    Conservative blogger Pamela Geller, founder of a group called Stop Islamization of America and a vocal opponent of the mosque near Ground Zero, blasted Mr. Obama in a statement. The president, she said, “has, in effect, sided with the Islamic jihadists.”

    .
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703382304575431862521820780.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsTop
    .
    The real problem which I believe this drills down to is exactly where does this President’s loyalties lie? Does he support America, or does he support Muslims in general, and subsequently it plays out that he is soft on Terrorism.
    .
    Since taking office and before, Mr Obama has been on an apology tour. His family history is repleat with relatives who are indeed Muslim, and not only practice the religion, but they favor the outcomes from the terrorist actions.
    .
    Americans can see clearly that Mr Obama does not want to offend or be seen as someone who opposes terrorist or other extremist factions of Islam. That places him in a very difficult spot, and he will continue to be painted as a sympathizer of Muslim terrorism. Pretty much the same as the Imam Rauf is also seen as a sympathizer of Hamas.
    .
    This will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

  • http://livingfortruth.wordpress.com livingfortruth

    I read your blog and all I see is “Shill, baby, shill”. I guess all the pretending leftists like you did for all of those years since McCarthy exposed the VAST LEFT WING COMMUNIST CONSPIRACY in this country, but your ilk had the barrels of ink in which to destroy him with the smears and lies, BUT TODAY they are now filling the Democrat Isles in congress, http://www.scribd.com/doc/35733956/DSA-Members-American-Socialist-Voter-Democratic-Socialists-of-America-10-1-09

    I find it interesting that the Obama’s and democrats can get food taken out of childrens mouths, http://thehill.com/homenews/house/114271-dems-consider-more-food-stamp-cuts-to-fund-child-nutrition-bill
    in order to pay back the teachers unions for their votes,
    Obama can sanction a religious building and a world wide trip of a controversial religious figure, http://www.gopusa.com/news/2010/08/ground-zero-mosque-imam-on-religious-outreach-trip-for-obama-admin.php
    And YOU DO NOTHING ABOUT IT, when we ALL KNOW YOU WOULD TAR AND FEATHER A CONSERVATIVE ADMINISTRATION WHO DID THE SAME THING.
    No wonder Gallop has a poll out that shows how mistrusted you are.

  • homerhk

    “The real problem which I believe this drills down to is exactly where does this President’s loyalties lie? Does he support America, or does he support Muslims in general, and subsequently it plays out that he is soft on Terrorism.”

    This is President Obama you are talking about? President of – what country was it again? – oh yes USA? This President who in his remarks at the Iftar dinner presaged his views on the mosque by saying “This is America” – by which he means of course, “This is America – we don’t do religious bigotry here”. This President who talks about Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus and non-believers?

    “Americans can see clearly that Mr Obama does not want to offend or be seen as someone who opposes terrorist or other extremist factions of Islam. ”

    Is this the same Mr Obama who has escalated the war in Afghanistan, killed more ‘terrorists’ with drones than his predecessor did, is waging a somewhat shadow incursion into Yemen and Pakistan? Yes, I can see by those actions that he is really scared of offending terrorists…

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

    You’d do well to note that Pamela Geller is a certifiable nutcase. If you want to advance your cause, you should probably choose your sources more carefully.

  • newfreedomblog

    And a second Drudge link………
    .

    Hamas agrees with Obama, “Build the Mosque at Ground Zero”

    .
    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/hamas_nod_for_gz_mosque_cSohH9eha8sNZMTDz0VVPI
    .
    And from a 9/11 first responder;
    .

    “Hamas first came up in the mosque debate earlier this summer when Abdul Rauf refused to describe the group as a terrorist organization — despite the State Department listing that identifies it as such.

    Tom Brown, a chief opponent of the mosque, said: “This is what we’ve been saying . . . Imam Rauf is a radical Muslim who will not call Hamas a terror group.”

    A retired firefighter who was a first responder on 9/11, Brown lost 100 of his FDNY friends at the Twin Towers.

    “How much evidence do we need that this guy is a radical Muslim?” he asked.

  • kevin

    Why is that so confusing to the media? Who really made the gaffe here?
    .
    Clearly, the president is at fault because the media was too stupid to understand what he said.

  • kevin

    You have it mostly right, except the attitude is “Hooray! The president is off-message!”
    .
    Because when they can spend all their time and attention on a non-issue like this “gaffe” our ADHD-riddled media can avoid having to do the hard thinking on serious issues like the economy and foreign policy.

  • kevin

    Well, I do not think this will go away as soon as you think it may. Drudge has not one, but two references to the Ground Zero Mosque in their report today.
    .
    Rusty unwittingly makes a great point here — this story isn’t going away, because the media takes its assignments directly from that chronic right-wing enabler and noted fedora enthusiast Matt Drudge.

  • kevin

    Hamas agrees with Obama, “Build the Mosque at Ground Zero”
    .
    “Gingrich and Palin Agree with Bin Laden: America is at War with Islam.”

  • kevin

    Maybe if YOU USE MORE capital letters in YOUR BIZARRE RANTS people will FINALLY TAKE YOU SERIOUSLY.

  • http://livingfortruth.wordpress.com livingfortruth

    No Kevin, Islam is at war with America. And they are winning.
    It is a curious fact that those leftists who cringe at the notion of a CHRISTIAN Theocracy, are doing their level best to allow for an ISLAMIC Theocracy, you being one of them.

  • newfreedomblog

    Actually kevin, Drudge also has two other Muslim mosque stories posted as well. In total 4 links.
    .
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100814/ts_afp/uspoliticsreligionattacksobama_20100814172344
    .
    http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iHIt9JRwyOIxxcNucgE_z7JR9I4AD9HFQ9DG0
    .
    I particularly like this second link, don’t you?

  • http://livingfortruth.wordpress.com livingfortruth

    Kevin,
    Since I cannot use bolding to stress certain points, I use capitol letters. I gave links to my “bizarre” rants, something that leftists do not regularly do. They just make crap up, like “Palin and Gingrich agree with Bin Ladin…..”

  • newfreedomblog

    It is unfortunate that Obama is so scripted. His inner circle does keep him on a short leash it seems. And, we also have the lapdog lame stream media, who have finally come out of late and begun to ask some questions of the annointed One, which at these rare occassions, we get to see Obama un-scripted, and begin to see his real self.
    .
    However, this truly was a gaffe on Obama’s part. He attempted to straddle the fence, and slammed himself right down in the middle on this one.
    .
    I for one do not believe at all that he would be against the building of the mosque at all. He like the rest of those on this very site who are using for the first time in a long time the actual constitution to back up their side’s full approval for building this mosque. Obama not only wants to see it built, but we will probably see stimulus money go towards needed community improvement projects right in front of the old Burlington Coat Factory building.

  • newfreedomblog

    You can bold things in your comments, livingfortruth. If you put before your bolded comment, and at the end of where you want to bold it put then it will look like this…
    .
    Here is how you bold your comments
    .
    http://www.htmlcodetutorial.com/quicklist.html
    .
    The above link will provide you with the basics. Thanks to stuart zechman who pointed me in the right direction some time ago, it is very helpful.

  • newfreedomblog

    “You’d do well to note that Pamela Geller is a certifiable nutcase. If you want to advance your cause, you should probably choose your sources more carefully.”

    .
    I am sure you find Geller as abhoring as I do Markos Moulitsas Zúniga from Daily Kos or Arianna Huffington from Huffington Post.
    .
    In life we simply pick our poison, yes?

  • kbanginmotown

    bobell:

    What’s interesting to me — and, now that I think of it, this may be your point — is the way that a member of the MSM instinctively omits them from the sentence describing the result of their conduct.

    Bingo! You understood my meaning exactly.
    .
    Yet again, a member of the MSM bemoans a tragedy while failing to recognize his involvement in said tragedy.
    .
    I agree with you that it is too easy too often just to “blame the media”, however, I think you’d agree that some stories are indeed “media-driven”. I believe this to be a purely media-driven story.
    .
    BTW: Thanks for the language log link!

  • http://livingfortruth.wordpress.com livingfortruth

    thanks newfreedomblog

  • http://livingfortruth.wordpress.com livingfortruth

    thanks newfreedomblog

  • shepherdwong

    “In life we simply pick our poison, yes?”
    .
    No. Religious tolerance is the life blood of America. You are the poison.

  • allthingsinaname

    The GOP has turned a corner from a main stream political party to White Supremacy faction; intolerant of other cultures, and races; living in fear, and losing what they think is theirs, I.E. dignity, respect, and integrity.
    >
    I wish I could say otherwise, but I can’t.

  • stewartiii

    NewsBusters: TIME’s Scherer Blames Press Pool for Obama’s Flipping and Flopping on Ground Zero Mosque
    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2010/08/16/times-scherer-blames-press-pool-obamas-flipping-and-flopping-ground-zero

  • shepherdwong

    Oh I think that the race-baiting and calls for religious bigotry that now define one of the two political parties of the United States and that are fundamentally dividing the country in two, is a pretty serious f*cking issue all right. The point is that Scherer’s editors and publishers won’t let him cover the story even if our country depends upon it (assuming he had the stones to try).

  • stuartzechman

    My pleasure, Rustydog.
    .
    When arguments are more readable and understandable, it makes the blog a more useful resource for everyone, even when –maybe especially when– I vehemently disagree with those arguments.

  • slofiredon

    …….it is pretty obvious that a whole bunch of you folks are going to the “cool-aid” stand way too much! You are advocating that the Federal Government step in and dictate the outcome of a Local, City Planning issue about a building?
    If you want that kind of Government influence move to China or Russia but be careful because they will put you in prison for speaking out. By the way……feel free to give away your rights but not mine………..ok.

  • allthingsinaname

    Don’t be absurd! The Constitution determines what laws a local government can write, I.E. they must pass constitutional muster.
    .
    The local government has already determined that the Mosque can be built.
    .
    It would seem to me that it is the GOP and the rest of America who trying to tell the local government what to do.
    .
    Who’s rights are you trying to take away?

  • apr2563

    Conservative principles violated:
    . Property rights
    . Rule of law
    . Federalism
    …….
    Who are those violating these principles? Conservatives.

  • earljr1

    You are a hypocrite of the first order, april. All of this anger, but it is ONLY pointed in one direction. Why have we not seen some of this anger directed at the lies perpetrated by this administration? Why not reserve some of this anger for good old Charlie and marvelous Maxine. Why do you get angry if a journalist points out liberal malfeasance, but celebrate if it is another smear directed at Sarah Palin? Why, indeed?……because you ARE a hypocrite, that’s why.

  • http://livingfortruth.wordpress.com livingfortruth

    Again, I find it interesting that those who hate Christianity on here, and do not seem to care that a Eastern Orthodox Church which had a presence there was DENIED rebuilding their church, are oh so enamored with ISLAMIC theocracy.
    You guys are nuttier than a ten pound bag of pecans.

  • jstan442

    my my he is just like clinton and his’ it depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is’-just a smoke screen to fool the american people who love our country-as for discrimination look at the Christian religion which is maligned by all lefties-they don’t mind putting a cross in urine becoz they know we will not chop off their heads-try that with the cult book koran and see if you will be laughing after wards-it is you people who will be the death of america-obummer is a marxist (he has no loyalties except to his ideals of everyone must be taxed and equal-we are equal under the law-but not equal in ideas, resourcefulness etc) and NEVER should have been elected but we can fix that in 2012

blog comments powered by Disqus