If you did not watch the Tonight Show or 60 Minutes when President Obama was interviewed you may also have missed some of the commentary around the internet and various news outlets indicating both venues were not without problems further suggesting puzzling choices by the White House.
Mary Kate Cary at US News and World Report is of the opinion that the 60 Minutes interview was a good choice because Steve Kroft is not a professional comedian and no gaffes were present by her observation plus it was done at the White House causing Obama to look Presidential.
Other reports and commentary feature criticism of Obama’s special olympics gaffe on Leno and describe what Kroft said about his laughing on 60 Minutes as being punchdrunk. You would not have to look far to find more reports or reactions to President Obama as responding in puzzling ways to other serious events. And news in general has started showing a lack of confidence in President Obama and his team.
Here are some blog links reacting to Obama’s 60 Minutes display or Leno appearance.
But if you somehow feel the MSM is superior to the blogosphere you can check these reports.
While MSNBC’s First Read merely regurgitates a 60 Minutes summary the title of the report is interesting.
If anybody was wondering why Barack Obama chose 60 Minutes as the one news outlet for an interview on his buy-my-economic-proposals-please TV tour, they got their answer Sunday night: Beyond the 16 million viewers who tune in each week, correspondent Steve Kroft played it safe and soft with the President, much as he had done during the election last year.
The NYT fish wrap points out the 60 Minutes Obama interview drew 16 million viewers and Entertainment Weekly indicates that won the Sunday ratings. In this day of tivo’d or recorded or video on demand everything one could safely watch the NCAA basketball tournament confident anything newsworthy from the interview would be available later.
You can also find another lame sales pitch from Christina Romer on this topic at youtube, go figure. The conclusion to draw is the Obama crew has done nothing to make their agenda or plans more palatable. Take for instance the taxpayer partnership with private investors for ‘toxic asset’ purchases promoted by Obama.
At least one member of Congress was heard reacting to the same nonsense to be noted here. The taxpayer will invest about 93% while the private sector will invest 7% and the profit or loss will be shared equally? How is that a good deal for anyone but the 7% investor?
You and a friend or family member find a great investment. The friend or relative proposes you invest $9300 of the ten thousand venture while he invests $700 and you will share the profit. If the investment went up 20% and you sold it you would get $1000 return on your $9300 (a 10.75% ROI) while your friend or relative would get the same $1000 and experience a whopping 242%+ ROI. Are you dumb enough to take that lopsided risk?
Obviously if your investment is a total failure your loss is nearly ten grand while your partner loses less than a thousand.
This is probably the most telling example of how stupid things are in Washington. If this is the carrot you have to dangle for private investment in toxic assets then what is so bad about the common fix of Chapter 11?
So the special olympics gaffe or ‘punchdrunk’ gaffe of Mr Obama pale in comparison to the ridiculous game plan his brain trust floated for buying toxic assets of failed US ripoffs.
I urge the public to continue to reject proposals offered thus far to supposedly solve economic problems. If those who continue to participate in the irrational love fest for the new President with no evidence to support that position the only thing we can look forward to is not holding the rest of Washington accountable. Just the fact that few are aware or upset about the current 3.6 TRILLION dollar budget and numerous other TRILLION dollar proposals or current liabilities facing public funding for this great nation is enough to forecast a continued downturn. One thing that Kroft asked Obama that was presented on Blog @ MoreWhat.com long ago is this. Mr President, is there a limit to what we can spend? Obama’s answer was essentially we can spend until we can no longer find money to borrow. Isn’t that part of what got us in this mess to begin with?
And some may wonder why I have no confidence in the federal government including OMG, the leader of the free world, President Barack Obama. Ya, I again left out his middle name as it only seems to p–s people off even though PBHO chose to use it at his inauguration. Just one more little tidbit that makes little sense.
Stanford Matthews MoreWhat.com