Obama slams ‘false equivalence’ media

[SecularMotion]

At a fundraiser last night, President Obama unleashed a surprisingly spirited and comprehensive attack on both-sides-to-blame media coverage. While he has taken issue with Beltway coverage before, what was particularly noteworthy this time is that he made the case that “false equivalence” coverage is fundamentally misleading in the sense that it obscures the basic imbalance that currently exists between the two parties.

“You’ll hear if you watch the nightly news or you read the newspapers that, well, there’s gridlock, Congress is broken, approval ratings for Congress are terrible. And there’s a tendency to say, a plague on both your houses. But the truth of the matter is that the problem in Congress is very specific. We have a group of folks in the Republican Party who have taken over who are so ideologically rigid, who are so committed to an economic theory that says if folks at the top do very well then everybody else is somehow going to do well; who deny the science of climate change; who don’t think making investments in early childhood education makes sense; who have repeatedly blocked raising a minimum wage so if you work full-time in this country you’re not living in poverty; who scoff at the notion that we might have a problem with women not getting paid for doing the same work that men are doing.

“They, so far, at least, have refused to budge on bipartisan legislation to fix our immigration system, despite the fact that every economist who’s looked at it says it’s going to improve our economy, cut our deficits, help spawn entrepreneurship, and alleviate great pain from millions of families all across the country.

“So the problem…is not that the Democrats are overly ideological — because the truth of the matter is, is that the Democrats in Congress have consistently been willing to compromise and reach out to the other side. There are no radical proposals coming out from the left. When we talk about climate change, we talk about how do we incentivize through the market greater investment in clean energy. When we talk about immigration reform there’s no wild-eyed romanticism. We say we’re going to be tough on the borders, but let’s also make sure that the system works to allow families to stay together…"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2014/05/23/morning-plum-obama-slams-both-sides-to-blame-media/

[drm604]

1. I love it when he takes the gloves off.

He tried for too long to get along with people for whom not getting along is seemingly part of their basic ideology.

[DFW]

2. He's not running for anything any more.

He has nothing to lose by telling it like it is.

[drm604]

3. That's probably the correct explanation.

But I have to wonder if it really would have cost him politically. I suspect that instead of hurting him it may have helped him as well as some other Democratic candidates. But he's a much better politician then I'll ever be, so who am I to say.

[DFW]

4. He's cautious by nature

Maybe, considering his personal history, it's only normal. But the few times I've met him, one of which was an hour long, he says what he wants to say, but doesn't like to ramble on or offer spontaneous off-the-cuff comments. Definitely not Joe Biden or Bill Clinton. He's lightning quick, but doesn't offer a lot without thoroughly pondering what he's going to say. If he finally came out swinging this time, it's because he thought about it for a good while beforehand, and came to a decision to do so.

[drm604]

5. I can't argue with thoughtfulness and caution.

[zipplewrath]

6. "From the left"

Kinda funny hearing him speak for the left. I wonder who on the left he speaks to with any regularity. Because I can guarantee you that there are voices "on the left" that are proposing some very "radical" ideas on climate change, equal pay, foreign policy, clean energy, etc. Nobody in the party leadership I'm sure, much less in the White House, but I'd hardly put any of those folks in the "left" column.

[Sunlei]

7. An excellent President, I wish he could run for a 3rd term. Our country needs him in our Gov.

Doubt he would want to run a 3rd time.

I was a bit worried he was going to decline the 2nd run, because it took a while for him to discuss privately with his family.

[blkmusclmachine]

11. The Party, and the Country, needs someone FAR to Obama's Left. Be glad to see him go. Just hope he's

not replaced with another Republican. (And NOT HRC, either!)

[JayhawkSD]

8. It was at a fundraiser.

I'm rather of the opinion that anything any politician says at a fundraiser should be essentially disregarded. He is not talking policy, he is trying to raise money from a partisan audience. He is trying to "fire up the base" to get them to open their wallets. He is not going to discuss real governance, he is going to be as radical and hyperbolic as he can, and I dount that anything he says actually means squat.

I'm not talking about Obama, here, I'm speaking generally, but I don't think Obama is any exception.

[Sunlei]

9. I think everything he says, fundraiser or not is honest. Not exaggerated.

[blkmusclmachine]

12. Okay, then!

[Arthur_Frain]

10. I think he's a decent enough man.

But he has disappointed me too often with his unwillingness to take the gloves off. I wish he had been more of a scrapper from the start. Would have loved to see him not compromised on Obamacare and gone ahead with a single payer option instead. After all that compromising, which is what I feel created most of the problems with the ACA in the first place, not one of the bums from the other side even voted for it.