Obama and the Press Play Wiffle Ball While Americans Strike Out?

During his second take-it-to-the-people appearance this morning in Ft. Myers, Fla, President Obama mentioned that "last night, I addressed the nation..."

Really? And all along I thought that was supposed to be a press conference, not a speech. But, while every president has tried to use every public forum to make points, the president's first official face-off with the White House press corps was another swoon in the fascinating, often collaborative drama of the new no-drama-Obama world.

I mean CNN had a digital clock on screen most of yesterday counting down the hours, minutes and seconds to the event like it was the first Apollo moon shot. Much of the TV I watched before and after the press conference had people who questioned the administration's stimulus plan getting pretty beaten up. Rachel Maddow on MSNBC was particularly cutting on the new Republican Party chief and at least one senator, a Democrat, who had pushed to cut out some portion of the $800 billion.

Maybe they deserve it. And I don't want to just say, "No, we can't." But I also don't believe in giving the guy a pass because, aside from recording and recreating for our audiences the hope, enthusiasm and change he represents, it's also the press' job to hold his feet to the fire as the most powerful man in the world. Admiration for who he is and what he represents shouldn't mean getting weak in the knees at critical moments, at least not for the press.

I went on Hardball late in the evening, where Chris and his guests seemed to think the press conference went well for Mr. Obama. I said I thought he'd been given pretty much of a walk by most of the reporters. The show had barely aired when I got an email from an old friend and a long-time, respected Bay Area journalist about my remarks.

"Please say it isn't so" was the subject line. "Saw you on Matthews's show tonight," it read. "Rather surprised at your comments, including "the reporters didn't do their jobs." Are you planning to move out of Marin County?"

I'm not moving, but I get the point. I was also hyperventilating a little on Hardball about the DC press just because I wanted to throw a small wrench into the hungry engine of hero worship going on a lot of places where watchdogs are supposed to be standing guard. (I didn't see Fox last night, which may have taken a different view.)

Let's take a brief spin through the press conference:

Mr. Obama likes to give long answers, unlike the last guy. And sometimes it seemed that he'd mastered the concept of the more you say, the less you have to say as he used every question about the economic crisis to repeat many of his talking points on it. The reporters obliged him pretty much; there weren't a lot of fastball follow-ups. Also, the White House had announced that they'd chosen a day in advance who would be called on to ask questions (hint: someone from Huffington Post; no one from the Wall Street Journal). So what were all those other pros doing there besides filling the theater? Good backdrop, I suppose.

While some analysts last night and this morning gave him kudos for expertly dissecting and articulating what all these billions meant, I thought he whiffed on some questions.

Was the second $350 billion in bank bail-out money enough? He didn't answer the question. Was he going to go after the prior administration for crimes in the conduct of policy, as Senator Leahy wants them to do? Didn't really answer the question (though there was no real comfort in his waffling, "looking forward" response for all those shadow waterboarders and phone tappers). And the venerable Helen Thomas asked him if any country in the Mideast had nukes. He said he "would not speculate.." What? He's the President of the United States and he doesn't know if Israel has the bomb?

He said "I don't think I underestimated" Republican resistance to his stimulus package. OK, maybe he misunderestimated it (tip of the hat to W). That's why he "lost the narrative" for a few weeks, as one pundit put it.

But the real double espresso for me in that hour meant for pressing on the truth is when he was asked about his dire language that he'd used about the economy, that without his package, the country was headed for an economic spiral we might be "unable to reverse." No, he insisted. What he said was that we might be in a spiral that's "much harder to get out of" if his plan isn't passed.

Sorry, Mr. President, but you did say "unable to reverse" at your first town hall in Indiana only hours before. If Tim Russert were still alive and had Barack Obama on Meet The Press, he'd use the clip to confront him.

What's the big deal? Hey, I hope the audacity of hope and about a trillion dollars gets the job done, too. I don't like to talk or think about icky scenarios, either. But one of the things we were promised by this president was straight talk, express and local. He's not living up to that promise or doing public service by fudging in the name of optimism.

The "lost decade in Japan" doesn't really mean anything very specific unless you're Japanese. To give credit, he did step to the brink of full disclosure by using the "c" word. But, Mr. President, do us all a favor and spell out what that catastrophe would look like. Use a little fear-mongering because it works, we're staring at it anyway and why not? It isn't the speech-making equivalent of waterboarding - more like showing citizens and elected officials the ugly equipment so they have a better sense of what might happen.

Let's start parsing the high rhetoric of hope with the plain language of reality.

For more, read Bronstein at Large.

Comments

[leopoldmozart]

Two of Mr. Bronstein's "unanswered questions" to Obama were naive:

1. "Do any Mideast countries have nukes?" Of course Obama knows. But Israel has officially remained mute on the issue, and no American president has ever acknowledged Israel's nuclear status one way or the other. It's one of the those weird international gambits that Bronstein, I'm sure, is well aware of.

2. "Will anyone from the Bush administration be prosecuted for crimes?" Bronstein's humorous aside notwithstanding (is anyone really thinking about “shadow waterboarders” when discussing Bush administration investigations?), the ultimate targets of an investigation into torture, abuse of surveillance etc. would be Bush and Cheney, not the shadow guys. If an investigation did lead to Bush, Obama would be confronted with the same dilemma Gerald Ford faced after Watergate. Bronstein is old enough to know why Ford pardoned Nixon, what Ford meant when he said, "Our long national nightmare is over", why it is excruciatingly difficult to indict a former president, and why Ford called it the hardest decision he ever made. So, obviously, Obama is not going to give a definitive answer to that question right now.

To be honest, I'm constantly confused by Mr. Bronstein's attacks on Obama and his occassional defenses of Bush. Why does it seem to rankle him that most Americans rightly view Bush as the worst president in history, and embrace hope that Obama will undo Bush's years of corruption and incompetence?

[Charmed]

Geesh another article by somebody trying to tell the President what to do....just in case you haven't notice "He's got this".

[MrBadger]

Ah, give the guy a break. He's only been in office less than a month, has a nightmare to handle, and a very narrow path to walk. He's not doing things they way I would, but hey, he got elected not me. I remember in the primaries wishing he'd be more forceful and punch back harder. He was right. In the election I remember wishing he'd be more forceful - again he had it right. At this point I'm willing to entertain the notion that he might end up playing this one right as well.

[lesterbud]

What is a Phil Bronstein?

[twofish]

Bush had high poll ratings for several years after 9/11. He was still wrong about most things. It's important to speak up when you think things are going wrong, whatever the polls say.

One of Obama's problems is style: even when he's describing a looming catastrophe, he's so cool and measured, he doesn't convey the emotion. After a regime that constantly tried to stoke fear in the populace, this is actually a relief. But it may make it harder to motivate the public.

Someone on the teevee commented that Obama was "going back to campaigning" with his town hall meetings. Well, that's one way to get people to stay involved, but what if campaigning is what he does best? People are not inclined to stay in campaign mode however. We think our job ended when our guy got elected. Now we expect him to get the job done. That isn't a good model for grass-root democracy, and suggests we'll stumble from one "strong man" to another until we find one that won't turn loose of all that power when the time comes.

[emncaity]

Now that is one of the most perceptive comments I've heard in a long time on any forum.

[mitsie]

Our President has an approval rating of 75% the Press including journalists, less then Cheney. Don't tell our new President what he has to do. I think he is doing what he promised, and if you don't think he is telling us enough, you haven't been listening.

[YouDecide]

Obama Total Days in Office = 21

What? You think there's a shiny red button that he can press to fix all the mistakes of Bush and his crooks?

He needs to continue to speak the truth to Congress and the American people which means REPEATING the truth as often as necessary to drive home the points needed to goad Congress into action.

When Bush took over in 2001 the country was in great shape and had a surplus. 8 years later...well?

Let's all get behind this guy and keep pushing to help him get done what he said need to get done.

[Elcigaro]

Bush Total Days in Office = 21

What? You think there's a shiny red button that he can press to fix all the mistakes of Clinton and his crooks?

He needs to continue to speak the truth to Congress and the American people which means REPEATING the truth as often as necessary to drive home the points needed to goad Congress into action.

When Clinton took over in 1993 the country was in great shape and had a surplus. 8 years later...well?

Let's all get behind this guy and keep pushing to help him get done what he said need to get done.

Careful what you wish for, you just might get it!

[Clatech]

Earth to Obama !!!!!!!!!!!!!!‏

Can someone please tell Barack Obama to quit saying he inherited this economic crisis and remind him that he was a senator when Democrats controlled congress long before this so called meltdown started?

Talk about avoiding responsibility!

If I whined like that on the job, I'd be seeing pink real soon!

[mitsie]

I hope President Obama ( it is rude to call him Obama) keeps on saying he inhertited this economic crisis because 75% of us approve of what he's doing. Quit whing about him.

[mwm4756]

HaHa. And for 8 years the left wing called President Bush, Mr. Bush or simply W but wouldn't refer to him as President Bush. What hipocracy!!

[mwm4756]

Go look at the polls. Roughly 66% of the people disagree with the stimulus package in its current form. Most want most of the pork cut out and to only include items that will create jobs and stimulate the economy.

[leopoldmozart]

Wow, Clatech. How can you pack so many misstatements of fact in a little 4 sentence post?

1. "He was a senator when Democrats controlled congress long before the so called meltdown started." You mean the 6 months before the housing market failure when the Dems finally took the house (but not the senate)? Or do you mean 1984 when the Dems lost congress due to the Contract with America? Do you understand the connection between timing and cause-and-effect?

2. "Talk about avoiding responsibility!" Actively trying to fix a problem, rather than taking a year long victory lap and legacy burnishing propaganda campaign like Bush, sounds like taking responsiblity to me.

3. "If I whined like that on the job, I'd be seeing pink real soon!" Barack Obama is the most cool, professorial, measured and irenic president we've had since FDR. Are you even paying attention?

[Dukedraven]

You have my sympathies as well, Phil. While I don't like the hero worship that goes on in America (See Capt. Sulley), it's good to be on the other side for a change. Do you know what it's like to hear people go ga-ga over Reagan for 30 years? I feel like an Israelite waiting 400 hundred years for a Deliverer to come, and now finally, Obama shows up. Okay, he ain't Moses and he's not going to save us, but at least he's a nice, fancy symbol for Democrats.

[MsCanadian]

I find that Obama repeats the same general talking points, but doesn't get very specific about his plans. It's apparent that nobody knows what to do about this crisis. But it would be good if they would stop and plan long term and revise the system, rather than keep doing the same old thing that doesn't work.

[hlhicks]

Really, because all day I 've heard people say that he is too detailed and wonky.

[antaeus]

To echo this, even Keith Olbermann tonight pointed to the president's hedging on Bush prosecution.

[ArchAngel]

We have an administration headed by a slick talking sound biter.

The reality is that policy and actual administration is on the same uninterrupted continuum to the detriment of us all.

[BBackSoon]

I am not making excuses because I think it is too soon to require them, but I will say that maybe the reason Obama is not giving direct answer is because no matter what he says it will be used against him.

He has to think about not only the past and the present but also the future. If he goes after Bushco full bore, which I personally wish for, he will be opening up a can of worms that will grow into Republican snakes in later years.

If you will remember from the campaign, he does not always answer or react quickly but when he does it is in the form of a battle axe in the hands of a surgeon.

[Gudrun]

Yes, I remember when people were urging him to get nasty with Hillary in the campaign. Turns out, he didn't need to, and he knew it. People said the Reverand Wright thing was going to bury him, and then he pulls out a speech about race relations in this country that brought people to their knees. Give him some time, folks, he will figure it out.

[Aaror]

I have to agree, remember, part of the reason the Repugs went after Clinton for Monica was they wanted revenge for Nixon.
Who cares what Nixon actually did, the Dems had the gall to hold him accountable for his crimes, and must be punished.
On the flip side, the folks who worked for Nixon (Cheney and Rumsfield come to mind) took the pardon of Nixon as a signal that they could do it again without punishment, I would like to see some signal that will tell the next Cheney to not bring wiretaps and other facist tactics back.

[northstar11]

do you really need him to spell it out for you.

the economy is in bad shape
the bushies squandered trillions
corporate america is throwing gas on the fire
the fleecing of america continues unabated-tarp 1 and 2

the pigs are gorging at the crisis trough with the spout wide open.

or is it better if obama says it.

[antaeus]

How does any of that relieve him from giving a direct answer?

[Asmodeus]

Amen. I voted for Obama, and cheered him on. Not because I felt all of his policy positions were correct, or because he can actually speak and not sound like he rode the little bus to school. I voted for, and cheered on the current president because he was brave enough to say even a mere fraction of what we're all thinking. Then he surrounded himself with the same people who's bright ideas, and unmitigated greed got us into this. Now all we get is doublespeak with a side of foot shuffling when asked a direct question for things that only require a yes or no answer, like: Will you prosecute the crimes of the Bush administration? Or why are you giving concessions to repugnacans when they won't vote for the legislation anyway?

What a joke.

[nomobull]

grow up or do better.

[emncaity]

Oh, absolutely. Get yourself elected president, with all your millions, Asmodeus. And if you can't, well...you are thereby disqualified from criticizing the president.

I just think we ought to get behind him like good Americans. I mean, you're either with us or against us, right? No...wait.­..hmm.....