New Jack City: Obama Disappoints with Paint-By-Numbers Approach

Was8854670Am I missing something here?

With the world situation in total turmoil the President heads to Kansas City to give a – what – rah-rah speech? Not about sanctions against Russia, Israel, the Gaza Strip, the shot down Malaysian aircraft—just fluff.

Translation: a cheerleader speech that added nothing to what we haven’t heard over and over before. Really, one of his most generic stump speeches ever.

Not that it was a bad presentation.

After all, Obama’s a very gifted speaker. But the content of his speech was totally predictable from start to finish. Come to think of it the President’s speech at the Uptown yesterday reminded me of one of those fiery movie sermons delivered by Elmer Gantry

And for that he made a two day trip here costing hundreds of thousands – if not millions – of dollars in equipment, security and whatever other expenses were associated with his excursion.


President Obama @ The Uptown in Kansas City

Was it REALLY worth it?

No wonder the cable news networks—not to mention the big broadcast networks—pretty well steered clear of it (in fairness lowly MSNBC broadcast a small portion of the speech live) .

Our local affiliates on the other hand went berserk with wall-to-wall coverage of Obama from landing to dinner-to hotel-to speech-to airport and departure coverage.

I don’t knock full television coverage, especially if there’s something important being put on the table. You know, other than Arthur Bryant’s running out of cole slaw.

However what we got was nothing more than of one of those paint by numbers stump speeches, without so much as mentioning what’s really going on in the world. It was little more than a pep talk.

I had expected more.
This entry was posted in Jack Poessiger and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to New Jack City: Obama Disappoints with Paint-By-Numbers Approach

  1. chuck says:

    “I had expected more.”


  2. the dude says:

    What did you really expect from what is basically an elected teleprompter puppet?
    That’s all that job is these days.

    • chuck says:

      If we like our empty suits, we can keep our empty suits.

      Maybe, until the Individual Mandate kicks in, then we won’t be able to afford ANY suits.

  3. I don’t think most Americans are listening anymore. But one part of the speech — “stop hatin’ all the time” — did go national. Will be interesting to see if that’s a one-time line or if it’s the start of a new talking point.

  4. Stomper says:

    Ah, back to politics. Thanks Jack, even this extremely short offering is enough to get us fanatics to jump in here.

    First off, anyone who has been even a moderate political observer for administrations back to Reagan and maybe beyond should know the game and how it’s played. I don’t disagree with anything you wrote or the opinions of Chuck and Dude above. If you’re not a fan of Obama or role of government from the democratic perspective then those opinions are completely valid.

    In my opinion, the top priority for Obama should be the upcoming mid-term elections. If the GOP takes back the Senate, he’s in trouble. Control of the Senate is a close call. House should remain GOP. Mid-term elections are typically not favorable for sitting Presidents. At this point, the middle of his second term, the O man needs to be a cheerleader for the rest of the party and try to give them a boost for November. The obstructionism (hatin’ to use his words) of the GOP in the last 6 years is the best place for him to hang his hat and stir up the base. The threat of the impeachment and the House action to “sue the President” has actually helped Dem fund raising and made a lot of independent voters question the GOP strategy. Obama is smart (imho) to ride that horse for as far as it gets him and the party. Lots of voters, including those in the middle, give it some validity. Heck, even a few GOP members of the House voted against Boehner yesterday in the “sue the President” action.

    Presidents have done this forever. Money spent on travel, security, equipment, etc. is part of the game. Both sides have played it since way back. It’s hypocritical to jump on Obama and ignore that fact.

    Finally, yes, there is a lot of really scary stuff going on in the world today and America, as the major economic and major military power can exercise SOME level of influence. But when the current President, or any President, can’t even control his own Congress or SCOTUS, does anyone really believe that Obama can control Putin, Ukraine, Hamas, Israel, Mexico, North Korea, China, etc. etc. etc.

    Ask PR guys what works, Repetition of the same basic message does sink in.

    Thanks again, Jack. I , for one, appreciate the red meat.

    • jack p says:

      Thanks Stomper—-

      Hell he even lost control of the coleslaw at Arthur Bryants!!!!

      Seriously though you make some great points in your analysis of the situation.

  5. Nick says:

    I was lucky enough to be there live and found it entertaining for what it was: cheer-leading. And that’s okay, because cheer-leading is an important part of the job; every president has to do it.

    More, it’s worth pointing out –again and again and again– that this particular Congress is not merely a ‘do nothing’ body, but an actively obstructive one, because the news organizations tend to focus only on the more sensational aspects of the tussle (talk of impeachment, Bohener’s crybaby lawsuit) rather than hold that body (more specifically, the House) to task for not actually legislating. So if Obama feels he needs to travel the country to reinforce this fact, so be it: the travel costs are the same regardless of the contents of his speeches.

    As for your early points: Russia, Israel, the Gaza Strip, the downed Malaysian aircraft?
    They’re important in the “keep an eye on them” sense. And, via back channels and diplomatic efforts, there is work being done. But so far no single incident, or even combined incidents, rise to the level of being a threat to America’s national security, despite what the (chicken)hawks would have you believe.

    Yes, the world is an increasingly dangerous place, but America is NOT the world’s cop, nor should we be. It is only via the UN and like-minded NGOs that anything of long-term substance will be done (IF anything can be done); to willy-nilly insist America be involved in every conflagration world-wide is a recipe for disaster, benefiting no one except our ever growing military-industrial complex. We would be far better off spending our resources working on a.) a national energy policy/strategy that relied on anything but oil/coal…

  6. Paracelsus says:

    You know what is guaranteed to help with these critical situations, what would be a serious and constructive approach to solving the real and substantive issues? Introduce an impeachment-lite lawsuit that has no prayer of going anywhere. Perhaps we will see more of those bizarre Boehner crocodile tears when it peters out.

    No, doesn’t make much sense to me either. But if you’re the Republican party, you know you haven’t got any real issues on which to run, nor is your rabid tea party base interested in them whatsoever. Who’s your frontrunner now? Please tell me it’s Michelle Bachman.

    • the dude says:

      When you have plumb run out of original or rehashed ideas and strategery, lawsuits or impeachment proceedings always provide sweet salve for the empty GOP soul.

  7. harley says:

    sorry jack…maybe you’ve seen too many sci fi movies to understand what the prez
    was saying.
    or maybe you weren’t in tune with his overall theme.
    he surely could have talked about the Malaysian plane/Ukraine/Russia/Palestinians/
    Israelis/missles/cease fires/terrorism….and in fact he did. You weren’t listening.
    His words…very simple…very direct…very religious (he too loves god)…very
    If we all listened to those few words most people never paid attention we wouold
    be a lot better off. All of us!

  8. PV_Pathfinder says:

Comments are closed.