Politico: “Obama struggles as communicator”
Of all the pitfalls Barack Obama might face in the presidency, here is one not many people predicted: He is struggling as a public communicator….
New York Times: “Weekend Opinionator: Obama’s Communication Breakdown”
From giving contradictory statements on the economy to making gaffes about the Special Olympics, team Obama has lost the communications magic that propelled it to the White House….
In terms of pure miscommunication, however, no event compares to the president’s appearance with Prime Minister Brian Cowan of Ireland, during which a Teleprompter malfunction caused Cowan to repeat parts of the Obama speech and the president to thank himself for inviting everyone to the event…
Trivial stuff? Perhaps. But there are plenty of similar failures to synchronize on issues that nobody thinks are unimportant….
The Anchoress: “Obama sans Teleprompter: not pretty”:
Sigh. One almost gets tired of saying it, but one must say it, still: Can you IMAGINE what the press and the Dems would do with that, had Bush said it. Can you IMAGINE what the press and the Dems would have done with the Irish PM Teleprompter gaffe (the press has helpfully embargoed the video, so Obama doesn’t have to see it playing 24/7, as Bush would have – had Bush so gaffed). Can you IMAGINE what the press and the Dems would have done if Bush had given the Prime Minister of Great Britain a lousy pack of 50 “Classic” DVD’s that didn’t work in the UK?
Senior White House aides concede that the AIG scandal made it difficult for them to communicate their message last week….
Pundits are questioning Obama’s ability to communicate
Michael Wolff’s The Newser: “Barack Obama Is a Terrible Bore”
The guy just doesn’t know what to say. He can’t connect. Emotions are here, he’s over there. He can’t get the words to match the situation.
This began, I’d argue, from the first moment. He punted on the inaugural. Everybody ran around like crazy trying to praise it because if Barack Obama couldn’t give a speech then what?
But now, at week 11, we’re face-to-face with the reality, the man can’t talk worth a damn….
You can see the fundamental mistake he’s making. Having been so successfully elected, he’s acting like people actually want to hear what he thinks. He’s the great earnest bore at the dinner party. Instead of singing for his supper, he’s just talking—and going on at length. The real job of making people part of the story you’re telling, of having them hang on your every word, of getting the tone and detail right, the hard job of holding a conversation, he ain’t doing.
He’s cold; he’s prickly; he’s uncomfortable; he’s not funny; and he’s getting awfully tedious.
He thinks it’s all about him…. This guy is leaden and this show is in trouble.
You should also look at the Veterans Administration dust up this week. The policy proposal could not be explained in a sound bite and thus, the Obama Administraiton created a controversy from which they had to back away.
Jackie Mason once referred to then-NYC mayor David Dinkins as “a fancy schwartzer with a moustache”. It would be impossible not to impute some racist meaning to that statement, however innocent (ie, descriptive, not invidious) its intent. Nevertheless, it seems to suit the current president, minus the moustache!
David,
Apparently, Jackie Mason already beat you to it.
Jackie Mason: Obama’s a “Schwartza”
Since I’m no expert on Yiddish, I’ll leave it to others to debate whether that term is more offensive than “maccaca” or a slaughtered monkey cartoon in the NY Post.
And Tammy Bruce couldn’t help herself today on syndicated radio either, calling the Obamas “Trash in the White House”.
…
Am I missing something here, people? You mean to tell me after 8 years of Bush-speak somebody has the audacity to complain about President Obama’s ability to speak or communicate.
Perhaps those who criticize most vociferously should just dispense with the charade and use the term they REALLY want to about the Obamas.
–Cobra
“Perhaps those who criticize most vociferously should just dispense with the charade and use the term they REALLY want to about the Obamas.”
Everyone who predicted that criticism of Obama would result in accusations of racism should now take their victory lap.
MJ writes:
“Everyone who predicted that criticism of Obama would result in accusations of racism should now take their victory lap.”
Well, those who choose to criticize the Obamas with terms like “schwartza” and “trash” should expect to be accused of using racial overtones.
In the real world, MJ…words have meaning. The ones I post in here are parsed and scrutinized, and I don’t have near the audience that Tammy Bruce or Jackie Mason does.
In fact, this is a crystal clear example of WHY President Obama chooses to use the teleprompter so often. This is not simply because every single President since Eisenhower used a teleprompter (Harry Truman did not, largely because of poor eyesight), but because he knows that as a BLACK MAN holding the position, everything he says will be more parsed and scrutinized than any leader in history.
The reality of RACE in America is the presupposition of Black Inferiority orchestrated by the conservative faction of the WMPS. The very concept of a Black President, particularly a left of center Democrat, to many White conservatives, is heresy to begin with. Only a “Black” Jesus would sting more, IMHO (though some anthropologists already have some interesting theories.
President Obama most likely knows what other African-Americans, including myself knows already. No matter what you achieve or accomplish, there will always be many out there ready to tear you down simply because of race.
–Cobra
Claiming your opponents are critical because of your race is the refuge of those who cannot defend their ideas.
MJ writes:
Claiming your opponents are critical because of your race is the refuge of those who cannot defend their ideas.
Who’s doing that here? I defend my ideas on Discriminations with style.
Slurs and name-calling seems to be the refuge of the rabid-right.
Or did you not read the post I put up?
–Cobra
“I defend my ideas on Discriminations with style.”
Calling people racist without cause isn’t defending ideas, it’s avoiding them.
Maybe you haven’t heard, but facts need to be logically relevant to an argument before they actually support it. Your argumentation amounts to “proving” that fusion is possible because solar energy exists. When someone points out this doesn’t mean anything you explain the methods of solar energy collection without any understanding that it’s all irrelevant.
So your continued (and only) point seems to be that anyone against Obama (and Democrats generally) is racist because ugly racist things have ocurred in this country. These things don’t follow.
So in this case Bush’s opponents have spent 8 years telling us his inability to speak is such an embarassment it should be disqualifying for office. Yet you now claim that anyone who criticizes Obama’s speaking must of course be a racist. Why? Criticizing speaking ability has been perfectly within bounds. Except, of course, when directed against Obama.
So much for those who voted for Obama hoping for racial reconciliation.
MJ writes:
“So in this case Bush’s opponents have spent 8 years telling us his inability to speak is such an embarassment it should be disqualifying for office. Yet you now claim that anyone who criticizes Obama’s speaking must of course be a racist. Why? Criticizing speaking ability has been perfectly within bounds. Except, of course, when directed against Obama.”
You would have a point if the arguments made against Bush’s speaking ability were based upon his use of a teleprompter.
As I pain-stakenly explained, EVERY President since Eisenhower has used a teleprompter, including George W. Bush.
If President Obama is being uniquely criticized for using a teleprompter, one must ask the question where this criticism has been for the last 50 years, and what makes this President different from the others?
It’s actually very enlightening, because in actuality, President Obama participated in about 25 debates during the campaign, multiple nationally television and radio interviews and multiple press conferences.
The American people have heard a whole lot of this President off-script, and he’s still quite popular.
…
How much this fact must sting some of my friends here I can only imagine.
–Cobra
“If President Obama is being uniquely criticized for using a teleprompter”
He isn’t. He’s being criticized for being a poor speaker when he isn’t on the teleprompter. The lengths you have to go to to claim racism should be telling you something. But that would require integrity, so I guess there’s no chance.
MJ writes:
“He isn’t. He’s being criticized for being a poor speaker when he isn’t on the teleprompter.”
1. What world are you living in? Of course President Obama is being criticized for using a teleprompter.
2. Being a “poor speaker when he isn’t on the teleprompter” would surely manifest itself during the 25 or so DEBATES Obama engaged in during the campaign, and the multiple interviews and press conferences he’s participated in.
That did NOT manifest itself.
I get it though. I really do. I understand where Jackie Mason’s coming from. And Tammy Bruce. And Rush Limbaugh. And Sean Hannity. And Fox News.
I understand perfectly.
–Cobra
Cobra,
The telepromter comments are being used to highlight his failures when speaking without one. Please try to keep up.
What “failures” are those? LOL.
This whole bruhaha is simply a failure of the Republican opposition. There’s a leadership gap in the GOP, so they’ve turned to hate radio hosts, Fox News, hack newspaper writers and bloggers to carry water for them with nonsensical arguments about “teleprompters.”
I wouldn’t be out on the limb to wager that this President has engaged in more unscripted conversations,town hall meetings, interviews and press conferences in his first 66 days as President than most have done in their entire terms. And you know what? He’s good at it.
Right wingers are grasping at straws. They’re becoming unhinged.
–Cobra