The NY Times front page links to Charles Blow's column exhorting Obama to be more visibly emotional and empathetic. OK, the notion is ghastly enough, but the Times link justifies the subscription price:
Blow: Obama, Give Them Something They Can Feel
Hmm, does the Times want a President who feels our pain or... oh, I am moving on.
BUT SERIOUSLY: Blow, who is the Times other race-grievance columnist, exhorts Obama to be more visibly angry. But I bet if I reprised the campaign coverage I could find many articles noting that Obama had a special burden to stay cool and avoid the unfortunate Angry Black Man stereotype that lurks in our collective conscious.
So which is it - should Obama be cool, or angry? Beats me (although I Boldly Bet that "calm and effective" would trump "angry and impotent"). But I am disappointed that Blow missed this obvious opportunity to blame Obama's seeming detachment on the prejudices of white America. What kind of race grievance columnists is the Times running out there these days, anyway? Oh, well - Frank Rich can pick up this slack tomorrow.
Awesome. What's gonna enrage folks even more, is when they realize that ALL of our oil is now imported, and the lights won't stay on, that cost 5 times as much now to operate.
Posted by: Pofarmer | May 30, 2010 at 06:39 AM
The cool thing about the structural changes that Obama is attempting is that they are pervasive. If anything goes wrong for the next half a century, we can legitimately blame Obama, and make the case for it.
===================
Posted by: Got a brownout on your personal feelings of well-being? | May 30, 2010 at 06:49 AM
Ext,
I see where you're coming from. At least this time he actually bothered to mouth the word, as opposed to just letting all the media outlets supply the 'outrage', 'fury', 'anger', 'lividness', 'incensed' etc that he was supposed to feel about the release of the Lockerbie Bomber.
BTW did you see the other night the link that that very same released convicted murderer of 200 plus citizens was doing well in a Libya mansion, 6 months after he was supposed to die because of his medical condition? Feel free to guess my emotion about that?
Posted by: daddy | May 30, 2010 at 06:50 AM
Heh, daddy; more proof the infidels had the wrong man.
===============
Posted by: Innocent if he drowns. | May 30, 2010 at 06:55 AM
Egads. Who knew Chris Matthews had a Sunday morning show?
Anyway, one of the commenters was pretty adamant that this wasn't Obama's Katrina, this was Bush's Second Katrina.
Posted by: Pofarmer | May 30, 2010 at 07:42 AM
Shorter McGinnis: Nobody in my family was a hero ergo being a hero is impossible.
Just another self-obsessed boomer loser.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 30, 2010 at 07:59 AM
Anyway, one of the commenters was pretty adamant that this wasn't Obama's Katrina, this was Bush's Second Katrina.
Yes, Joe let me kiss your ass Mr. President klein.
Posted by: Jane says obamasucks | May 30, 2010 at 08:05 AM
Exactly Captain.
and if the self-obsessed boomer losers are "into" something, they make laws and regulations to force everyone to participate.
I look forward to hearing from Bill in AZ about the rally. God bless Arizona!
Posted by: Janet | May 30, 2010 at 08:14 AM
Anyway, one of the commenters was pretty adamant that this wasn't Obama's Katrina, this was Bush's Second Katrina.
Yes, Joe let me kiss your ass Mr. President klein.
Ah, that explains it. Also interesting Mathews comment that "This isn't caused by incompetence or detachment like in the Bush administration."
Yeah, no bias there. I promptly turned it off.
Posted by: Pofarmer | May 30, 2010 at 08:23 AM
More on Sestak:
I'm sure someone said this already, but the story they hatched serves two purposes. First, it at least arguably gets them out of a felony trap. Second, it gives Holder cover not to appoint special counsel.
I don't think Issa is going away, but someone in the Senate will have to champion it for it to last. Their scheme appears to be perfect right now in that Sestak is the one who'll have to take the fall.
MSM won't advance something that can hurt their party as would this, but they'll get another hypocrisy merit bag. It wasn't that long ago that we had Plame and the US Atty flaps.
Posted by: Bob S | May 30, 2010 at 08:30 AM
Jane says..: Chris Wallace just said that one Democrat strategist told his that a more apt analogy would be to describe this as Obama' Iranian hostage crisis. Yowza.
Posted by: Bob S | May 30, 2010 at 08:33 AM
Crappy syntax to the last
Posted by: BobS | May 30, 2010 at 08:35 AM
Hey Bob. Thing about the Story is, you really have to want to believe it to believe it. You need an ex President to offer a sitting Congressman an unpaid position on a Presidential advisory board? Really?
Posted by: Pofarmer | May 30, 2010 at 08:38 AM
Lew Waters wrote a great Memorial Day article at his Blog.
I'd be real surprised if it doesn't bring tears to anyone who reads it.
Posted by: Pagar | May 30, 2010 at 08:38 AM
I know Pofarmer. Too bad it'll probably fly. Without a Senate majority, nothing will happen. Schumer will make sure of it. Looks like Sestak is left holding tha bag and that Clinton threw him under the bus. Holder will never be fired as he's a Democrat hack first and foremost. Obama sn Clinton can count on him playing ball. In the end, Democrats may just see that it's worth losing a Senate seat to Republicans to get this one to go away.
Posted by: BobS | May 30, 2010 at 08:50 AM
Is it just me, or do you think God is getting a kick out of showing all those know-it-alls who said... Lousianna can't have it worse then George Bush in the White House.
At least the media could acknowledge that Bush was dealing with a natural disaster totally out of his control, while Obama is dealing with a disaster of his own making, overseen by his own adminstration and his own personnel.
Posted by: pops | May 30, 2010 at 08:52 AM
Mark Kirk is the ultimate RINO--not only is he fanatically anti-life, he's not even fiscally conservative: he voted for Cap and Trade.
Posted by: anduril | May 30, 2010 at 08:53 AM
"This isn't caused by incompetence or detachment like in the Bush administration."
Oh I know. Don't confuse anyone on that panel with facts. I will admit that I can only bear to watch those moonbat shows when things are going badly for the democrats, so there is some joy in Mudville.
Posted by: Jane says obamasucks | May 30, 2010 at 09:00 AM
Issa is on with Wallace. He's not buying the story and even if the story is true, they've still broken the law.
Posted by: BobS | May 30, 2010 at 09:06 AM
anduril: While I don't particularly care for the use of the RINO tag, I'm afraid that Kirk is one of those lost souls who buy into the climate change/global warming gambit (see McCain and Graham). They've invested so much into it that they are unable to walk back from it. I'm looking forward to seeing one of them have a tooth fairy epiphany.
Posted by: BobS | May 30, 2010 at 09:12 AM
BobS-
It's part belief, part huge swath of his donor base are greens. IIt's about the only way he can get elected in this district and still beat the machine. Too much Cook County in the district.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | May 30, 2010 at 09:17 AM
Sure it's a lie, and now Obama has placed his fate in the hands of Bill Clinton. I wonder if he'll mount it and give it to his wife.
=======================
Posted by: Naw, way too Burton for the likes of that lush. | May 30, 2010 at 09:19 AM
He wants a UN job in the new global carbon government.
=========================
Posted by: Winners, losers. I'll take one from Column A. | May 30, 2010 at 09:21 AM
I wonder if he'll mount it and give it to his wife.
Please don't use the verb "mount" in the same sentence with Slick and the glacier. Chelsea is the only evidence that mental-retina-detaching act ever happened.
On the FNS interviews, Issa looked very relaxed and Rendell looked like he was passing a kidney stone. Btw, how does the Sestak campaign committee proceed with this matter hanging over them: Wote for me because I can resist the present and past crooks in the White House? Chances of the jugeared imbecile making a campaign appearance?
Juan Williams is bringing out his long-weekend enhanced stupidity.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 30, 2010 at 09:40 AM
First of all, I would never be so disrespectful, second, one sees the motive in McGuiness's twisted world view, to tear down someone who is heroic in stature,
Posted by: narciso | May 30, 2010 at 09:42 AM
overseen by his own adminstration and his own personnel.
Obviously you've missed the memo. It was mainly Bush personnel still left at MMS that were the problem.
Uhm, yeah, O.K. 16 months into it, Obama get's to blame Bush Personnel, with his own had and administrators appointed, BTW, for the oil spill. 8 months into the GWB administration, with Clintoon appointees still in place as head of Counter Terrorism and CIA, it's all Bush's fault all the time regarding 9/11. Yep, no bias here.
Posted by: Pofarmer | May 30, 2010 at 09:43 AM
Wote == Vote
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 30, 2010 at 09:44 AM
Ok, if this doesn't occasion a filibuster, they ought just pack it in, in the LUN
Posted by: narciso | May 30, 2010 at 09:47 AM
As I understand it the Illinois primaries are over, so the choice for those voters are as described by bgates at 01:02 AM.
IMO, not voting, in the general election, insures a Democrat wins every time.
Posted by: Pagar | May 30, 2010 at 09:50 AM