Rachel Maddow On Obama's Budget Speech (Hint: She loved it.)

[jefferson_dem]

Run time: 03:32 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUls2yhL6eA   Posted on YouTube: April 14, 2011 By YouTube Member: leftunderground Views on YouTube: 121   Posted on DU: April 14, 2011 By DU Member: jefferson_dem Views on DU: 3344

 

[JTFrog]

1. K&R and much love for Rachel.

:hug:

[bluestateguy]

2. Well Hrmph! That just settles it.

She's a DLC Blue Dog apologist!

:sarcasm:

[Buzz Clik]

6. +1

[Dokkie]

14. So true

I remember Rachel was one of the ones selling Obama's sellout of healthcare bill to the masses and also selling the Libyan war. With Rachel, you don't know when she is supporting a good bill for the people or just supporting the better of 2 evils.

Olberman on the other hand would make the distinction between the 2 and then tell you that he is settling and why you should accept the compromise. Oh how I miss Keith

[jsmandrake]

13. Yo, Hold On!....Consider

It pains me to hear you lose faith in Rachel. Don't.
Consider this as an example of a tactic that Rachel
sometimes employs....kinda like the 'shame' tactic
in that it seeks to work on the psychological level.
By this I mean, Rachel may be starting out of the gate
with the simple 'accentuating the positive' assertion.
Remember she is working on many levels in her broadcasts---
one of which is to newly educate a mass audience not used to
viewing/hearing politics in the ways we are already accustomed to.
She has to bring the kindergarteners up to speed after all!
(through no fault of their own since they've been the brunt of
mass societal manipulation since.. forever).
Taken this way, Rachel's comments last night could have been
focused on that segment of the population-- and so, her
patting the head of the dog (the President) that has publicly given credence to
liberal ideology in ANY way....may just have been building block
#1 for her.
My own true feelings/worries are mirrored in what Glen Greenwald
just wrote (Obama's Bad Negotiating is Shrewd Negotiating).
Further, I would venture to say that Maddow agrees with this
also.... yet, she is working a different angle to expose the same
AND, more importantly her task is to transform public thinking .

[demwing]

20. I'm not sure how you are formatting your posts

but because of the way your text appears, I think it is difficult to read, and may be clouding your message.

Let me see if I get you:

You agree with Greenwald (Obama is moving the center further right, and doesn't care so much about traditional Democratic party principles)
You hope we "Don't lose faith in Rachel..." because her comments were directed toward political neophytes, and ...

And thats where I lose you.

It sounds as if you're saying ("Rachel's comments last night...may just have been building block #1")that Maddow is using a common managerial technique used to coach performance - the Shit Sandwich

Start with a positive reinforcement (bread)
Outline the ares of opportunity for improvement (shit)
End on a note of encouragement (bread)

Am I correct?

If so, who is she trying to coach? The neophytes? If so, what is their performance issue? Is it just "being neophytes"?
If that's not who she is coaching, then who? Obama?

And if I'm not correct, if your are NOT saying Maddow is "Shit Sandwiching" someone, then please help me out and explain what you did mean.

Thanks!

[ElsewheresDaughter]

3. if President Obama sticks to it and fights to make it happen all the way through to the end...he

just may win back the base.

[INdemo]

5. I agree but he has always given great speeches..

Remember just recently when a clip was shown with President Obama saying (in his campaign)"If workers rights were ever in question or being violated he would put on a comfortable pair of shoes and walk the picket line with them"..Or something very simular..Well he didn't even address the labor,union issue in Wisconsin..So lets hope this is not just a great speech and no action.

[dennis4868]

11. ummmmm....

the union in Wisconsin asked Obama not get involved so he stayed out of the fight....we have been though this already....this post is #6 on my list as to how the PL and some liberals deal with Obama!

1.Read the day's headlines (in this case Obama not going to Wisconsin)
2.Determine a spin that characterizes the President and his administration in the worst possible light.
3.If such a spin does not exist, postulate what the President and his administration's response will be. Make sure that it is as negative as possible, even if it contradicts his past behavior.
4.Write endless blogs/posts on how the President has once again sold his "base" down the river and kicked hippies in the teeth (after punching them, of course.) It is not necessary for him to actually have done this. Your prediction that he WILL do this is sufficient.
5.When what you predicted turns out to be quite wrong, ignore that and focus on the next day's news item. No point in issuing a mea culpa. Just raise a fuss about something new and nobody will notice.
6.Lather, rinse and repeat.

[Buzz Clik]

22. +1

[florida08]

4. this needs to said again

and I don't think there's anything courageous about asking for sacrifice from those who can least afford it AND don't have any clout on capital hill

-$zing$-

[nevergiveup]

8. Yes, this was the best line in his speech.

[Buzz Clik]

7. This is a wake up call for DU.

Rachel Maddow has been cricizing Obama since the evening of the election in 2008 for triangulation and compromise.

But, her analysis of the speech was an unflinching endorsement of Obama's liberal credentials.

Hello? HELLO!!! Are you paying attention?

[jsmandrake]

9. ? Maddow response to O-speech

I'm not sure what Buzz Clik is insinuating here?
Yes- Maddow has not been shy in her measured critique of Obama all along .....
I'm personally believing her response is an example of 'accentuating the positive'
(which IS a tactic sometimes employed).
Though with greatest respect to Rachel, it is Glen Greenwald's last post which
pinpoints my my own thoughts & worries about the issue.

[Buzz Clik]

24. No idea who Glen Greenwald is. Help?

[Dawgs]

10. Her analysis was an endorsement of what he said in his speech.

Almost everyone on DU agrees that what he SAID was great. The problem with many of us is his actions. Hopefully they will start to match what he said yesterday.

[GOTV]

12. Hello! Are YOU paying attention? Obama always gives good speeches ...

... I for one loved it when he said that any bill he signs would have a public option.

Now I know that speeches do not make things happen.

I expect sometime in the near future we'll get the speech about how naive we were and how we just don't understand how Washinton works and how he had to give additional tax breaks to the wealthy and how he had to cut benefits to prevent even worse things from happening.

No, speeches are nothing to get excited about.

[chowder66]

17. ..get excited about vs knowing where he is coming from

Knowing what he would like to achieve may not get you excited but it gives me the information I need to push my elected officials towards that goal.

It is very important to hear these speeches for that purpose alone.

[demwing]

21. Understanding an Obama speech =/= "knowing where he is coming from"

What we've learned about Obama is quite basic - if you really want to know where he is coming from don't listen to the words, watch the action.

[Buzz Clik]

23. No. That is not the trend here at DU.

It's far simpler:

• Listen to his speech
  
• Compare the results of the legislation delivered by Congress to Obama's speech
  
• If the legislation doesn't match Obama's speech to the letter, blame Obama.
  
• Continue to support the Democrats in Congress who have repeated caved to the GOP.

It's really that simple. Unfortunately, American politics requires far more mental work to comprehend than that.

[chowder66]

28. Um...

While I understand your position in regard to "watch the action" and agree... it does not give you an understanding of the intention behind the action or the plan of action to pursue or is being pursued.
If I know what the president and democratic party are trying to achieve then I can plan on the course of action I will take. I prefer to be part of the action rather than sitting around waiting to watch.

[Hissyspit]

31. Yes, I believe I'm paying attention.

It was a great speech. Speech is important. He said many things he should have been saying and should say and many have criticized him for not saying these things and he just did.

I was "in the room" with him in 2008 for TWO great Obama speeches and one in 2009 (inauguration, o.k. It was outside, but so was Denver). I have seen almost all of them since he became President.

He didn't mention the wars and occupations. He used wiggle words with regards Medicare and Medicaid. His actions in relation to his rhetoric have a very mixed record, catalytic to skepticism for many, myself included, who want to support him.

To which stuff might you consider me as not being attentive?

[Buzz Clik]

32. There are those who strictly look for problems, and those who look at the progress he's made.

There are those of us who weigh one versus the other in light of the obstacles he's faced (*hack cough* weak Dems in Congress *hack hack*), and we consider he's done very well. Room for improvement? Sure. Fatally flawed to the extent we hear endlessly in this echo box? Not hardly.

[Stuart G]

15. Simple to the point, and the truth. ...

All peopel should see this..

[BigD_95]

16. thats the Obama I voted for

Give them hell!

[BlancheSplanchnik]

18. THIS must go to the Greatest--and VIRAL

I'd send it to Mr Splanchnik if he didn't hate the President so much and go ballistic and scary when I try to correct the lies his foxheadfundyrushbot brother feeds him (I know brother D. does, even though Mr. S denies it. Bullshit. When he goes to Ohio to and spends time with his brother, I know Fux is the living room centerpiece.)

:(

Anyway, people need to SEE THIS. People like Mr. S (who won't be seeing it. No cable here.)

I'm still fuming at the snip of CBS news, that showed this snip from his speech, then went to one of their "reporter" guys to comment--and the American public got treated to MORE time spent spewing forth the REPUKE lying spin about it, than spent on what the PRESIDENT actually said and what it meant. Presented to us AS IF the CONservative PROPAGANDA was valid criticism.

I was so angry...I'm STILL fuming, actually..... that's the kind of thing that feeds on the ignorance and survival fears of people like Mr. S who paid the price for the economic meltdown early on, having been eaten up and spat out early in the Florida construction bubble of the '90's.

He has a good heart but is not big on abstract or critical thinking and carries a lot of anger from Vietnam.

the one blessing---he went outside to smoke as soon as that piece of "reportage" started. I was greatly relieved he missed it once I saw it was nothing more than another ma$$ media repuke-funded hit piece.

[no limit]

19. You beat me to posting my own video :)

And although I think she did like the speech I wouldn't say that she loved it. She made it clear this is a benchmark for the president, he has set a line in the sand in a way. And if he breaks any of the things he outlined in this speech there could be hell to pay.

[jefferson_dem]

27. Hey there!

Thanks for the capture. :hi:

[Atypical Liberal]

25. link to full video?

Does anyone have a link to the full speech?

Thanks.

[JJW]

26. Perhaps she hasn't noticed

but his fine rhetoric (especially during campaign season) just doesn't mean diddly.

[PotatoChip]

29. .

for later viewing

[ReggieVeggie]

30. you wouldn't have posted this if she hadn't liked it

so there was no need for the aside