Monday, January 25, 2010
How Obama can turn things around: Lie (again)
The Daily Beast has an interesting piece by Samuel Jacobs here. Famous speechwriters (the ones who helped load the president's most famous teleprompter shots) are suggesting that, for the State of the Union address, Obama needs to move toward the center (ya think?) and basically tell the American people what they appear now to want to hear. In other words, lie to them – again.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
Out of line, Sanborn. There were no intentional lies, nor will there be any intentional lies in the State of Union address.
The piece by Jacobs doesn't say anything about lying. It offers some pretty simple ideas, universal thoughts about unifying an increasingly divided country.
Please show me, with absolute evidence, one verified lie by Obama, something that was said knowing at the time it was an outright lie.
I thought the forum was above this kind of stuff....
Sorry folks, but...
I believe that much of what Obama said in the campaign was designed by his speech writers to present him as being further to the right than he has proven to be.
Further his continued promise of transparency and bi-partisanship flies as a lie when you consider he did nothing to encourage Pelosi and Reid to open the health care debate to Republicans.
Guantanamo.
Will not continue the "failed policies" of the Bush Adminstration. (Not only continued them, but compounded them.)
Lies when Republicans tell them are lies. Lies when Democrats tell them are unintentional lies?
Many people voted for Obama based upon his promises, some knowing he had an extremely liberal agenda, and some buying the propaganda from his campaign staff. Many voters had a desire to distance themselves from a horrible Republican administration.
Jacobs piece doesn't use the word: lie. But the speech writers are again suggesting that he misrepresent what he has shown himself to be. Before, it was to get elected. Now, it is because the super majority is lost.
Michael, a lie is when you state something as fact that you know is untrue.
A broken promise is not a lie.
Obama promised quite a few things that haven't come to fruition. I'm not sure if you are aware, but he still has 3 years to work towards making his promise a reality.
As far as Republicans being involved in the healthcare debate, if their baying had not been taken into consideration, why would we still be dickering over a watered-down ineffectual piece of refuse that bears no resemblance to what the President asked for?
Once again, a failed promise is not a lie. None of the examples you have given are lies.
I agree with Taunia... please present a definitive case of an actual lie told by the President.
Aaron --
Government health care won't cost anything.
Michael - When did he say "Government health care won't cost anything"?
I don't recall ever hearing that exact phrase.
You know as well as I do that even if that phrase was spoken, it was likely within a context that would give it a different meaning than just putting it out there alone by itself.
If you're going to accuse someone of lying, I would think you'd have more evidence than a random, out-of-context phrase.
Making a promise that was never intended to be kept, is a lie.
Deficit neutral (Obama's words) ...means?
Deficit-Neutral. A term applied to legislative bills or proposals that pay for themselves over some budget period—for instance, by having in a single proposal tax increases that fully offset in value the proposed expenditure increases. (http://www.urban.org/toolkit/PolicyDecoderD.cfm)
...That is not the same as "won't cost anything."
Michael, how do you know that some of the promises that were made were never intended to be kept? Once again, you are making accusations without a shred of evidence...
Calling him a liar does seem a bit harsh, Michael. It seems to me that his lack of experience is showing through. I don't know that he intentionally misled the public, I think he just didn't know any better. He was being pretty idealistic at a time when we all wanted to believe in something good. I think he may have believed that he could do the things he said he could do- but it wasn't very realistic. Someone with more experience and/or maturity may have handled it all differently. Let's just hope we work ourselves out of this mess before Chinese becomes our official language.
All I'm saying, Michael, is that as the moderator of a multi-partisan political blog called "The Decorum Forum", I would think you would have the tact to say "make more empty promises" rather than "lie".
That's funny aaron- Michael isn't necessarily famous for "tact". One of the things you love to hate about him.
More experience and maturity? Oh Donna! This guy ran the most sophisticated and well-executed political campaigns in modern history.
His machine is anything but unsophisticated or inexperienced.
I've found a bunch of "unexpected broken promises" online, but I'm trying to find some that are not part of some Glen Beckish religious right forum. I'll post when I find those with the fairest premise.
It's one thing to have people telling you what to say and do during a campaign, but quite another to walk the walk once in office. Having run campaigns for people in the past, you should well understand the difference. You pulled the strings during the campaign, but how much participation did you have once they were elected ? Do you receive calls for advice from these locally elected people ? Do they call and ask how they should handle a situation ? How they should vote on issues of the council ? An election campaign is nothing more than an advertising campaign- does not compare to actually doing the job.
(Previous post deleted for grammatical reasons)
Ahhhh Donna,
You know better. In my capacity as a consultant on matters political, I have never suggested to candidates that they say one thing and do another.
Michael, you are still hung up on the idea (and completely ignoring Donna's point to the contrary) that every unattained promise has been an intentional attempt to deceive the public. And after one year of a four year term, no less.
Conservatives have accused Liberals of deifying Obama, but it appears that you the one with messianic expectations for his abilities as President. It's like you've all drank your own punch and are accusing the left of making you want to spike it.
Aaron, I think you missed my point as much as Michael has. I did not indicate that Michaeel ever told someone to say one thing and do another- but the truth of a campaign is that information is presented in a way to be most appealing to the voters. Sometimes that means slight embellishment, sometimes it means avoiding topics. Obama had an exceptional campaign crew. They sold us the Obama we voted for. The unfortunate reality is that he could not possibly live up to the expectataions of the bill of goods we were sold. My point was that he lacked the necessary tools - experience and maturity - to deliver the goods.
Sorry Michael- did not mean for that to be a negative towards you- you know I have the utmost respect for you and what you do. But I stand by my statement that campaigns are nothing but an advertising campaign.
Donna, I understood what you were saying.
I'm sure Michael has NEVER had a client who has said one thing in a campaign but was forced to do something else when elected, because by Michael's own logic that would make them a liar and NOT someone he would want to be associated with.
Aaron,
Truth be known, I don't have that great of a batting average. I've consulted on several campaigns and I'm batting 500. Two of those campaigns were my own and both resulted in losses.
Maybe I should have lied.
It sure worked for my last candidate's opponent.
Post a Comment