Woodruff scores RW points regurgitating a GOP Big Lie wrapped inan illigitimate question 4 President

[Bill USA]

Well, it has become a regular bit of self degradation on PBS NewsHour to hear Ms. Awful, Woodruff et al, grovel for approval from the psycho-fanatic-Right, by parroting GOP propaganda and fraudulent criticisms of President Obama. They don't even need flash cards anymore over at Fox News - Light, they have this crap committed to memory. (although, they must practice in a mirror at delivering it with as much affected ingenuousness as possible. - Woodruff shows a particular facility for this sort of thing in impersonating a journalist.)

In the interview of the President broadcast Wednesday, Aug 28th, Judy Woodruff, gave the PBS equivalent of a chimp throwing shit at a focus of primitive resentment - by asking the phony question (a question which importunes to put words in the President's mouth):

"... how much does it weigh on you that your policies haven’t made more of a difference in those areas?"

The President, always keeping his composure in the face of offensive, ignorant remarks gave a reasoned and measured response to Woodruff's shit blob of a 'question':
(emphasis my own)

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, it certainly weighs on me. In my first term, essentially, my job was to make sure, as you said, that the economy didn’t just completely collapse. It collapsed, but it didn’t go into a deep depression. And the reason that had to be a top priority was because, if it did, the folks who would have been hurt even worse were those middle-class families and folks trying to get into the middle class, who would have lost even more than they did. And what we were also able to do, at least in my first two years, was to initiate expansions Pell Grant programs, or make sure that we were providing help to cities so that they could hire young people during the summers. But, you know, obviously, an agenda that puts more people back to work has met resistance from the Republicans in Congress, and I recognize that.

But the – what is both troubling but also, I think, gives me a greater sense of urgency is the fact that this is a trend that’s actually been going on for a couple of decades now. As I mentioned in the speech, you’ve got technology that has reduced manufacturing jobs that used to be a foothold into the middle class, that has reduced things like bank tellers or travel agents that used to provide a good middle-class livelihood, and the new jobs that have been produced don’t pay as much. You’ve got global competition, jobs being shipped overseas.

All these things reduce the leverage that workers have, and as a consequence, it’s a lot harder for every worker – black, white, Hispanic, Asian – to ask for a raise. And employers know that. And companies are making great profits, but they’re not reinvesting.

So what we need to do is to go back to that principle that, if you look at our economic history, has always been the case. When we have broad-based growth, when the middle class does well, when people at the bottom have a shot, it turns out that’s good for everybody. It’s good for folks at the top. It’s good for businesses, because now they’ve got consumers who are spending more money.

And you know, a lot of what I’m going to be talking about over the next several months is specific steps, whether it’s helping keep down the cost of college or helping to do more to spur on the recovery in the housing industry or, as I’ll be talking about probably in the next several weeks, specific tools that we know work, proven practices that we know work to get more ladders of opportunity for people who are poor to be able to succeed.

The President could have elaborated upon the words "resistance from the Republicans in Congress".

..... He could have said something like:

"Just to bring you up to speed Judy, with what's been happening in Washington since I was elected - the Republicans have set a new record in filibustering (..oh, I'm sorry, that's a taboo word on M$M, isn't it) any and all of my efforts to get people back to work (GOP obstructed, at a minimum,4.2 million jobs), to invest in much needed infrastructure rehabilitation and just about anything else we tried to do to stimulate and rebuild our economy.

Two highly respected Political Scientists, Thomas Mann, of the Brookings Institute, and Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute (no less) characterized the Republican Party as an 'insurgent outlier' in American Politics for their implacable opposition to everything I have tried to do to repair the economic and social damage their policies (specifically Judy, Deregulation of Wall Street banks (particularly with regard to trading in occult financial instruments e.g. Credit Default Swaps), protection of Predatory Lenders from regulation - and policies promoting concentration of wealth in the hands of fewer and fewer people) have produced (perhaps they were afraid the contrast between the Democrats proficiently fixing an economy nearly destroyed by Republican style 'absentee government', deregulation and impoverishment of the '98%' was too much for them to allow happen without doing everyting they could to prevent it). ..... Thankfully, even with their rather remarkable animus towards me and all things Democratic, they did not succeed. Although they did succeed in significantly diminishing the recovery to their Trickle Down - Deregulation Disaster.

So you see Judy, it wasn't "my policies" which "haven't made more of a difference" as you asserted within your question - but that the Republicans have in their internecine war on me have succeeded in preventing me from getting much of my policies realized, making the livelihoods of millions of Americans the 'collateral damage' in their pursuit of their top priority - to make Obama a one term president (to quote Mr. McConnell).


OF course, Woodruff probably would have said, without batting an eye:

"Do you think Mr. President, with all due respect, your rather combative style of partisanship, could have caused the Republicans to give up hope of achieving any bi-partisan progress?"

...uhh, maybe Judy, you meant to say 'caused the Republicans to [FONT SIZE="3"]anticipate [/FONT] a lack of partisan comity - ON THE EVENING OF PRES. OBAMA'S FIRST INNAUGURAL'?

[unblock]

1. heck, i've heard plenty blame the civil war on lincoln

notwithstanding that south carolina seceded two and a half months before lincoln even took office....


similarly, i'm sure the republican logic is that they knew obama (mr. community organizer, mr. compromiser, mr. middle-of-the-road) would be a polarizing, partisan figure and that they had no choice but to adopt their just-say-no strategy.

because it's all obama's fault, you see.

[Faryn Balyncd]

2. PBS (& NPR) remains in 100% pandering mode to the RW --- They rely on the false & undeserved myth of

"liberal bias", so as a result they bend over backwards to constantly launder RW talking points by dressing them up in pseudo-centrist language.

They are a disgrace.

[Doctor_J]

4. that's why the fascists have stopped screaming about defunding

nothing more than taxpayer-funded GOP propaganda

[Doctor_J]

3. I wish the president would do more of your proposed second response

his presidency would be going much better. The "adult in the room" doesn't get things done by pandering to and schmoozing the children.

[Bill USA]

5. yes! For some reason he has been holding to the idea that if you act reasonably, it will move others

to be reasonable. This is a nice Sunday school sortof philosophy, but that only works if you are dealing with people within about 1 or so Standard Deviations from the norm. Once you get beyond ... oh, two s.d.s these people will only get worse when they don't encounter clear (you can't be subtle - they won't get it) opposition. Appealing to others to be reasonable doesn't work with inveterate kooks and recalcitrant nincompoops ...(and two year olds).