The Face of Team Obama Tells a Joke about "Race"
The face of Team Obama told a joke about "race" on a late-night TV show, and wasn't that newsworthy!
The face of Team Obama has been all over TV all the time for about a week, and wasn't it newsworthy that the face of Team Obama wasn't seen on Fox!
Fox didn't show the face of Team Obama when the face of Team Obama made a prime-time speech about healthcare, and Team Obama was very, very angry at Fox!
"We figured Fox would rather show 'So You Think You Can Dance' than broadcast an honest discussion about health insurance reform," White House spokesman Josh Earnest told ABC News.That's a reference to the program the Fox network aired at 8 p.m. on Sept. 9, when other major broadcast networks were airing the president's speech to the joint session of Congress.
But even though the face of Team Obama was all over TV (except Fox) on Sunday, and every moment of that media-blitz was undeniably newsworthy, Team Obama saved the most newsworthy moment for late-night TV, when the face of Team Obama told a joke about "race."
"I think it's important to realize that I was actually black before the election," Obama quipped.
Harharharhar!!!
What a quip!
And who really cares if that "quip" was composed by President Barack Obama's Director of Speechwriting, Jon Favreau, and then vetted by Michelle Obama and David Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel and the Director of the President's Office of Political Affairs, Patrick Gaspard, and White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, and probably examined and debated even in the tiniest West Wing offices, and not just because any joke that the face of Team Obama tells David Letterman could mysteriously backfire with consequences unforeseen by Team Obama, but also because...
That "quip" wouldn't be the last word on the show, and David Letterman would inevitably respond with another "quip," and then what?
The face of Team Obama might have to improvise, and when the face of Team Obama improvises, it sounds like this "quip" about a new Presidential helicopter...
"The helicopter I have now seems perfectly adequate to me. Of course, I've never had a helicopter before. You know? Maybe, you know maybe I've been deprived and I, I didn't know it."
That was the voice of the face of Team Obama before Team Obama, when the face of Team Obama was crushed in a Democratic primary by Bobby Rush, and that is not the voice that David Axelrod wants to hear on David Letterman.
But David Letterman likes the face of Team Obama, and just when the face of Team Obama was about to get lost, David Letterman intervened!
Obama: Well, first of all, I think it's important to realize that I was actually black before the election, so... [audience laughter and applause]Letterman: Really?
Obama: This is true. This is true. So...
Letterman: And how long have you been a black man? [audience laughter]
Obama: [laughs] And so the American people, I think, gave me this extraordinary honor, and that tells you, I think, a lot about where the country's at.
"This is true. This is true. So..."
Somewhere David Axelrod was screaming "Get back to the talking points! Oh, please, God, get him back to the talking points!"
But David Letterman likes the face of Team Obama, and he mercifully intervened...
"And how long have you been a black man?"
And then all the face of Team Obama had to do was laugh, and get back to the talking points.
Isn't he the best speaker of our generation? And what's wrong with Letterman doing real-time on-line editing? Dave always makes guests look witty and interesting.
September 22, 2009 4:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama (born 1961) may or may not be "the best speaker" of your generation, Generation X.
The best speaker of my generation is Lil Wayne.
"My picture should be in the dictionary next to the definition of definition."
Harharharhar!!!
The picture of Generation X is in the dictionary next to the definition of "nothing."
September 22, 2009 6:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Uh-oh; who the 'ell is Lil Wayne? Lil Abner's son?
September 22, 2009 6:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Li'l Abner's son was Honest Abe Yokum, who inspired the character of Jimmy Carter in "Presidential Comix."
This is Lil Wayne!
September 22, 2009 6:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
September 22, 2009 11:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll take Chuck D or Terminator X. I'm a Boomer, a Buster, a Bastard, a Stratocast Turd. Find my G spot, my Y knot, my Zeta-Jones, my Beta whore moans, roll it on Iggy, on Twiggy, on Johnny Cash and Slash meets Miss Piggy, M&M in the Dogg House, Biggy Bigg as Danger Mouse, Ice T for me means Bo Diddley (squat, not hot, like Black I'd P's with their humps stuck out)
September 23, 2009 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not to nit pick but I will Ruta...
Technically anyone being born in the early 60's, as I was in 1962, is considered to be in the tail end of the "Baby Boomer" generation and not part of "Gen X".
Just sayin'...
;-)
September 23, 2009 1:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
You Boomers want to steal everything from the pitiful X's... even their birthdays!
Shame! Shame!
Obama is a typical X. Never had a job, never wrote an article, never tried a case in court, never filed a brief, won a student election and retired to the White House!
September 23, 2009 4:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, but here it says the 'boom' went until 1964. So I see lumping me and my peers into Gen X as an attempt at revisionist history. ;-)
September 23, 2009 12:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't pin Obama as the voice of my generation.
That would be KRS-One. Or Kool Keith.
You Gen Y types are too locked into the spectacle to recognize the spectacular.
Lil' Wayne. Get real. He's the NASCAR of rappers: every square inch of his body and soul is an advertisement.
September 23, 2009 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is, like, sooooo true.
September 22, 2009 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's a joke that Rep Eric Cantor told to a Black woman:
Cantor told a woman whose uninsured relative needs a tumor operation that she ought to look into "an existing government program" or seek charity to pay for the operation. Way to stick to conservative principles.
The constituent said she has a close relative in her early forties "who did have a wonderful, high-paying job, owns her own home, and is a a real contributing member of society." Then she lost her job and found out she has stomach tumors and needs an operation.
"She has no insurance," the constituent said.
"This person is a very close member of my family," she said. "She's ill. And she has no way to have this operation. So I'm asking you, what would you do if this were your close relative. Your niece, your aunt, your sister or whatever."
Cantor suggested looking into "an existing government program."
"There are programs, there are charitable organizations, there are hospitals here who do provide charity care," he continued.
"No one in this country, given who we are, should ever be sitting without an option to go be addressed."
http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/09/cantor-to-constituent-with-sick-relative-seek-charity.php?ref=fpa
Isn't Cantor hilarious?
September 22, 2009 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's really "hilarious" is a President who doesn't even bother to send a healthcare bill to Congress, and sits around month after month with his thumb up his ass until something emerges from 535 sold-out politicians, and then wastes month after month with stupid concessions to Republican dead-enders.
That's "hilarious!"
Your story about Eric Cantor is just sad.
September 22, 2009 6:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
So you disagree with Sen Jay Rockefeller that a public option will be in a final bill?
Will a health care package pass?
Will more people be covered under the plan?
Will the risk of bankruptcy due to medical issues decrease under a health care plan?
Would life be any different for the woman iwth the tumors in the Cantor "joke" under the new health care plan?
(Realizing that the Senate and the House have to create the final package.)
September 22, 2009 8:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not exactly sure here what it is that has you all in a lather. Maybe you're not happy with Obama's approach on some issue, the issues that those talking points are all about. That's fine.
But no matter where on the political spectrum or matrix one exists, a president will need talking points in order to communicate in today's media. Even if you were president.
But no matter what kind of president one is, to be successful pushing big controversial agendas through the political swamp, one will need to find a way to reach those people who don't engage the news media, who are susceptible to a 30 second commercial on HCR, who will just as likely be influenced by a flyer left at their door or some buddy from high school who has a theory about what the government's plan really is all about. Even if you were president.
But every administration is going to be a team, with whoever is president being the face of that team. Even if you were president. the face of Team Rutabaga.
And so what if the president tries to make a quip. Even if it falls flat, or some believe it does (there were those that thought the helicopter joke was pretty good for a prez), any president needs to remain human. Even you as prez would find yourself from time to time attempting to be humorous (like this blog) and there would be those who will say it falls flats and undermined your agenda. But I would defend you in your right to try to remain human while being the Commander in Chief.
And what did you think Obama was going to inenvitably say that was so damaging had Letterman not saved?
For sure he's had his gaffes and wrong turns(special olympics joke, police acting stupidly), but what does that say except that he is human.
I've seen him do his share of improvised Q&A, and given how many interviews he has done since he has first announced his candidacy(including letting OReilly go at him) he has quite the good track record.
So I guess I missing the real reason that Obama going on David Letterman and reaching out to the general public is such a bad bad thing, evidence of just how terrible he and his team are.
September 22, 2009 5:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Since you're obviously responding to an entirely different diary, which spontaneously emerged out of something you ate or sat on, I have to agree with you...
It's junk.
September 22, 2009 6:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe you didn't mean for this diary on the face of Team Obama to come across as some long tirade, just like Obama didn't mean to offend anyone with his special olympics joke, but I don't see the whole point of this if it isn't. It all leads to that Team with a Face to get back to those talking points. And? what administration wouldn't do that? There's nothing inherently wrong that. That is after they laugh (sinisterly?)of course. Saved by Dave. So what?
Is your point that the team behind the face of Team Obama (cue scary music) has a special voice they want the face to speak with? That this team works to use the media to push their agenda when the other side is doing it too?
Seriously, your original intent may be totally cool. But this just comes across as pointless thrashing on an administration for doing what every administration must do, when there are legitimate grips with him and his administration.
The reason I read this to begin with because your title suggested this was going to be about race issue. And maybe that is really what you have a problem with. That he told a joke relating to his race? That no one had a problem with it? That everyone laughed and laughed while Rome burns?
September 22, 2009 6:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
And if a seating president goes on a late-night talk show, that is news. Because he is the president, and David Letterman is David Letterman, someone who is very much part of our cultural landscape (for better and for worse, and for what it says about our culture).
September 22, 2009 5:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
You probably meant "a sitting President," but your subconscious racism made a slip and turned Barack Obama into a maître d' or waiter.
Shame!
September 22, 2009 6:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or not.
September 22, 2009 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Being the insightful bloke I am, as soon as I saw that mistake (the dangers of trying to do this and work at the same time) I knew you would comment on it rather than address the content of my response.
September 22, 2009 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
The "content" of your response?
The "content" of your response is an unusually simple-minded example of petitio principii, begging the question, where you merely assume what you're supposedly proving.
A President on a talk show is news because it's the President on a talk show.
Harharharhar!!!
But on your scale, if you're "an insightful bloke," then Obama is Leonardo da Vinci!
Q.E.D.
September 22, 2009 6:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Okay, have to spell it out. He is the President, which means here is the guy who leading the way (not so perfectly) on our only shot at health care reform in the near future, is Commander in Chief while he have troops overseas, our economy is tettering to and fro. Not to mention will be the one to get us or not get on the right track to achieving real sustainable energy sources, and I go on and on. He puts himself in a situation where, yes, he has to come across as least improving some of the answers. Millions of people are going to watch, listen to him, some who like him, others not so much, and then pour over his words as you have done. So yes that news. Or potential news, he might give some more illumination on where he stands, where he hopes to take this HCR, Afghanistan situation, etc. so its covered. And once its covered, the coverage gets covered, such as by people like you. May not be the most worthy news, but art is art whether you think its bad or great.
And there something about a shared experience (one the draws for instance for seeing a film in a theater rather than at home), and so the public can all watch this together, being, yes, entertained, and then talk about it afterwards at work at home at the bar. And this is not bad in and of itself. As a community we need shared experiences, and we really lack the political ones.
Now if it this done to divert the people to shiny objects and away the real problems, corruption, etc. Then there is a problem with that.
September 22, 2009 6:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
You already spelled it out, and counted it out, too, on your short, stubby fingers.
Every time Obama blathers out even more meaningless bullshit on TV, it's "news," and since he did six network shows in one long weekend, there was even more "news" than anybody could comprehend, except a few brain-dead TV junkies like "acamus."
Okay!
September 22, 2009 7:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Which would be true if the overall general public, which is who he (and his team) is seeking to reach, watched all six. And then read blow by blow analysis of each show. But usually people just watch one maybe two. Or maybe just a snipet before shooting over to ESPN. And I seriously doubt most of those who watch David Letterman also watch Meet the Press.
With all the media options people have to choose from, if you want to be heard you have to put your face in front of a lot of cameras.
And what do the size of my fingers have to do with anything? Do you really really think that makes your point more valid? (I know you don't really think that.)
September 22, 2009 7:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
And since the media followed some wackos off into death panel land, just getting the public to engage the HCR debate without all the attacking and lies is not in my opinion meaningless. I don't agree with his whole approach behind the scenes, but I do agree with him that it is not enough that we get HCR, but that we should try and get as much buy-in as possible. If there isn't, the implementation phase will have even more hurdles to jump, thus lessening its chances at success.
September 22, 2009 7:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obviously I don't know what you are thinking, what is in your heart. Hence it was said tounge in cheek. I thought that you would have caught that. Sorry. Being too subtle. 2x4 approach to discoure.
And as far as David Letterman is concerned, I am not a huge fan of him. Not even a little fan. Ever now then he tells a funny, but in general his persona irritates the hell out me. But he is part of the entertainment fabric of this country which goes a lot farther towards defining the collective will then people like you and me hashing it out. That might be a sad commentary, but it is what it is.
When either one of us have the rating he does night after night, then we too become newsworthy whether we want to be or not.
September 22, 2009 7:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
my bad: have the pronoun "it" refering to nothing in particular. I was referring to "the insightful bloke" swipe you made.
September 22, 2009 7:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
After just a few short minutes in the School of Rootie, anybody can become a better writer!
Congratulations! (and I do accept Paypal!)
September 22, 2009 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
All I have is my gratitude.
September 22, 2009 7:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wish my name were Josh Earnest.
I happened to be stuck on the wrong side of 53rd Street yesterday on my way to my chiropractor's office when Obama's motorcade came barreling through Midtown. It was impressive. LOTS of low-riding rumbling motorcycles with their headlights on.
Like a swarm of NYPD bees.
I saw two Obamamobiles, and people were waving in both, but the glass was extremely tinted, so I can't really say I saw Obama.
But I do say it.
I was more concerned with looking for a spot to get through the police barricades, but as police barricades go, this one was impenetrable. Same barricades they always use. I was pretty late for my appointment, although it's not the first time.
Obama was on his way to see David Letterman, and after my appointment I sat at a Starbucks across from the Ed Sullivan Theater, sipping my drip coffee and chatting with Mario, the store manager who was on his break and drinking a banana javachip frappuccino. We watched the tourists futilely craning to see a glimpse of the president. He didn't appear, of course. There were two massive, beat-to-shit dump trucks parked in front of the theater, blocking the entire entrance. Blast protection.
Everyone on the street seemed surreally innocent and pure and predominantly white. Not a single teabagger protesting the show.
You'd never know from reading TPM that Obama encounters any friendly crowds. I was beginning to think the entire country was being overrun by sullen teabaggers, given all the sullen panty-twisted coverage of them on this site.
September 22, 2009 11:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Holy moly, gasket! That's harsh!
Has some very bad influence recently impinged upon your previously genteel existence? Perhaps a foul-mouthed internet predator, with a scheme for making internet millions?
Beware!
September 23, 2009 12:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, actually, my Cuban diva roommate has. But I put the kibosh on that, in a spectacular display of fire-breathing dragon.
Afterward, your post gave me some much-needed comic relief. So thanks for that. TPM has been exceedingly humorless lately.
Anyway, I think Obama's inability to make jokes is curious and disappointing.
September 23, 2009 10:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, the thought of this black-and-white puss going to the chiropracter's, dodging through a motorcade of low riders, getting wrenched back into that Siamese stretch, and wondering what the Doc would look like, cat scratch fever and all, that's a bit of humor release in itself.
September 23, 2009 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
You'd never know from reading TPM that Obama encounters any friendly crowds. I was beginning to think the entire country was being overrun by sullen teabaggers, given all the sullen panty-twisted coverage of them on this site.
Thanks for mentioning this, I felt I was alone in feeling it. It almost seems sometimes that some sections of the blogosphere miss the fear and loathing of the Bush years and don't want to give up that adrenalin rush of group-induced panic over every news story, all ending up with the summation that a fascist state was going to be installed tomorrow.
It seems like a bonding sort of thing, they have to have someone to scream about the crazies with, it's the purpose? Someone to get all freaked out about or its no fun? It is also interesting how many focus now on right wing talk radio and TV personalities, though wingers' power has much abated in the blogosphere, lefties have to keep this enemy alive by going to radio and TV talking heads? (Which have existed at least since the 80's, and are nothing new.)
Whatever it is, I really do get a strong sense this site is creating a different reality than the actual one out there.
It often strikes me that Marshall and Co. know which shiny things their audience loves--that which made the old "us vs. them" blogosphere of, say, the paranoid fighting states of Democratic Underground vs. Free Republic--and pump any stories perpetuating that paradigm. The right wing bogeyman will be given inordinate attention, wherever and however they appear, because it gets the audience all riled up and excited? It seems to be heavily in league with MSNBC on this, on continuing the whole paradigm. CNN lately seems very much to try to move away from the whole game and actually cover some news.
September 23, 2009 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Have armed citizens come to townhall meetings nd Obama speeches? Did the same thing happen under George W Bush?
Were Code Pink or MoveOn.org given the same type of cover by Democratic leadership as the Birthers or Rush Limbaugh have been given by Republican leadership.
I just don't believe that it all comes down to "Both sides are doing it".
I happen to believe that the tenor of the argument on the right does put Obama's life at risk. Even GOP leadership is quoting the "Tree of Liberty" line.
September 23, 2009 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Case in point, artappraiser.
September 23, 2009 11:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yup. Sigh, I've been reading it for 8 or 9 years, and it grows really tiresome.
Criminy, it wasn't even true when George Bush was president....the paranoid echo chamber living in nonreality land always had him and the wingers doing things like imposing martial law next week and invading Iran in a month. So many seem to live to fear right wing crazies. (One thing I admire about Obama is that he doesn't do so. I also think he--and not just his p.r. people-- has a very good pulse on the "silent majority" ofthe nation--so much so that his pandering to it might be a flaw that hurts him.)
As to the applause, I think a lot of U.S. citizens are simply still proud that a black man was elected president of this country, that that hasn't worn off yet. They might not be big fans of Obama the politician or Obama policies, or may not have even voted for him. The hatred, being overcovered (an understatement) by sites like TPM, is coming from the same wack jobs that has been with us since the culture wars started, a new variant of Vince Foster killed by the lesbian Hillary Clinton because he knew of the Clinton plan for one world government under the U.N....
September 23, 2009 12:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
P.S. Not for nothing did both George Bush and John McCain make comments about a historic moment of national pride with Obama's inauguration. Whether or not that came from the heart or from polling doesn't matter, because res ipsa loquitur. Contrary to blogosphere "wisdom" (again,) neither are so stoopid as to not know which way the wind was blowing.
September 23, 2009 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting observations about TPM, btw. Thanks, aa.
September 23, 2009 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
The reality is that hundreds (and I walked all the way from Fifth to Bway, looking for an opening, so maybe there were thousands) of people clapped when Obama drove by. No cheering or hooting, and certainly no booing. Just clapping. There really was something sweet and innocent about the crowd that made the security look like Shock and Awe.
Must have been all tourists. ;-)
September 23, 2009 11:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Please explain how the clapping crowd in Manhattan negates the weapons that appeared at Obama speeches, the talks of secession, and the "tree of Liberty" quotes. Are you saying that the two can't exist at the same time?
September 23, 2009 12:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
By the sheer numbers.
September 23, 2009 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
I understand the numbers, the wingnuts are a small segment.
Given the fact that weapons did not appear at GW Bush sessions, but are appearing now, if you were in charge of security for the President, would you be providing the same level of coverage for Obama as you did for Bush, or might you increase your security level?
Would you say that nothing had changed? Would you expect that the number of possible physical threats had increased?
September 23, 2009 12:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Also from before the election:
Stop freaking out, he expected it. Why didn't you? This has been with us since the culture wars started. Stop giving it more weight than it's worth. They are louder and angrier right now because they have lost more again. (George Bush wasn't even with them, though it took them a long time to figure that one out.) To fixate on them gives them more power than they deserve, it's like being scared of the monster under your bed.
And any president of the U.S. (as well as Congresspersons at town hall meetings, I might add) is threatened by possible assassination for many reasons. Having a few more or a few less interested in doing it doesn't change the general threat level much at all.
You can't change it that there are crazy mean-mad people in the world, and that always gets worse when there's economic bad times. Why fixate on the crazy people? Ever think of why they are carrying those guns? They feel marginalized and are afraid! They are pitiful, actually. And conspiracy theorists are pitiful in general, they can't handle reality, either, must make it fit into a narrative they can handle.
September 23, 2009 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
To clarify something that you said above about those who felt so bad during the Bush years. I disliked Bush because he was arrogant and incompetent. I didn't "fixate" on Bush and functioned very very during his Presidency.
I'm not "fixating" on the wingnuts, I'm just stating the obvious. Do I feel that Obama faces more threats than GW Bush? Yes. Does racism account for a large degree of the threat? Yes. That is not a "fixation", that is facing reality. I can deal with facts, and continue to live my life, just fine thank you very much.
I'm not sure how I empower wingnuts by just noting that they exist. I read about the H1N1 virus, but don't live in fear of influenza, even though I've got a cough (without muscle aches or fever) right now.
In your final paragraph, you seem to acknowledge that the fringe exists, but you just don't want to talk about them. That's fine. If you don't want to talk about them, you don't have to. But please, don't tell me that my little comment on a blog gives them any more (or less) power. I'm glad you agree with me that the nuts are out there despite the reception Obama got in Manhattan.
I really love the Marriott Marquis, it's just down the street from Letterman.
September 23, 2009 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
"You'd never know from reading TPM that Obama encounters any friendly crowds. I was beginning to think the entire country was being overrun by sullen teabaggers, given all the sullen panty-twisted coverage of them on this site."
You're delusional.
September 23, 2009 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're more blunt than I.
September 23, 2009 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can't help it. These idiots act like media management and corporate influence in politics began with the Obama administration. They do nothing but look for sticks with which to bash Obama, and have absolved every other player in American politics from responsibility, now or in the past, for the problems we face.
And yet they have the audacity to cluck their tongues at those who are concerned about a violent, racist, anti-democratic movement that has a significant presence in the media and a much larger influence over the politcal conversation than do the visitors to this blog - all the while attesting to their "more progressive than thou" bona fides at every opportunity.
They have decided that folks like myself, counseling a little moderation and patience in the service of our political goals, are their political enemies, not the followers of Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Lou Dobbs. When someone is that lacking in common sense, bluntness is required.
September 23, 2009 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're probably right. I found it amazing that RTB felt there was no threat because of a walk in Manhattan and the low numbers of the wingnuts. artappraiser's final paragraph admits that there are fringers, but it's just that he doesn't want to talk about them. Amazing
You are also correct that the posts are bash Obama, deviate into humor, dismiss opposing views .... rinse....repeat.
They would not address how they would handle security given the threat (same security as given Bush, or more) or how they thought a new health are bill would impact the public. They dodge the tough questions and just pat themselves on the back for being clever.
September 23, 2009 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rootie,
Since this is third time you have mentioned the helicopter quote I thought I would share my take on that interview. It strikes me today because after your discussion of Roman History (and meaningful speech???) the other day on my blog I thought you might appreciate it.
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/saladin/2009/02/obama-grants-cato-the-minor-th.php
These practiced lines are mighty hard to take seriously for us jaded folks, but the proletariat love em.
September 23, 2009 2:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
What the proletariat would really love is a Catiline instead of our pompous semi-Cicero of a President.
Is anyone now proposing tabulae novae, "new books" and a universal cancellation of debts? Rip up your mortgages, ye plebs! Your "underwater" house is now yours alone to inhabit forever!
And as for Catos in the current Congress...
Is everyone who profited from our wars now awaiting trial on a capital charge, as with the profiteers of the Sullan proscriptions?
It takes more than a frown and bald head to make a Cato!
September 23, 2009 3:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
I see Obama more as a C..C...Claudius.
September 23, 2009 11:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think he fancies himself more Marcus Aurelius.
September 23, 2009 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good luck with that one.
September 23, 2009 12:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Would that be "Stuttering C-C-Claudius," a cousin of Tic-Tac-Tacitus?
Claudius, the first Roman Emperor born outside Italia...
Harharharhar!!!
Kenya is the new Gaul!
September 23, 2009 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Under team Obama:
Will a health care package pass?
Is Sen Jay Rockefeller correct that a public option will be in a final bill?
Will more people be covered under the health care plan?
Will the risk of bankruptcy due to medical issues decrease under a health care plan?
Would life be any different for the woman with the tumors noted in the Cantor "joke" (see above) under the new health care plan?
(Realizing that the Senate and the House have to create the final package.)
I'm just trying to get a feel for opinions.
September 23, 2009 9:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Where I think you are correct is that it was very much a planned talking point. Were I don't think you have it right is that it was meant as a "har har" joke. It was a serious talking point presented casually, as in the way p.r. talking points were originally intended, to refocus the conversation on the point without being blatant. (So many forget the "don't be blatant" part because so many are so blatant about it on blogs.) In this case, that would be: quit giving so much attention to the small minority of crazies resisting the change that has happened to our culture. It's about ridiculing those who are denying reality. (Imagine if the John Birchers gotten equal attention from all those at center and left of center back in their heyday; had the same types been a bit more marginalized during Clinton's second term, and not given the national stage, we might not have wasted time with an impeachment trial.) Ridicule of and marginalization of reality-denying loonies is a good thing, especially when it's done by their favored scapegoat.
Tom DeLay wiggling his ass on national TV is just another sign of another win for the left in the "culture wars." The general cultural zeitgeist is really what the birthers et. al. are reacting to; they just can't handle the change.
September 23, 2009 11:49 AM | Reply | Permalink