Obama's Speech: Not The Turning Point He Had In Mind - Dan Froomkin/HuffPo

Obama's Speech: Not The Turning Point He Had In Mind
Dan Froomkin - HuffingtonPost
First Posted: 06-16-10 12:29 PM | Updated: 06-16-10 03:07 PM

<snip>

The most depressing thing about President Obama's profoundly underwhelming speech Tuesday night was that the White House thought it would change everything, when there was no good reason to think it would change anything.

White House aides had excitedly announced that the speech -- his first from the Oval Office -- would be an "inflection point," somehow turning eight weeks of growing anxiety about the disaster in the Gulf and the government's response in a positive new direction.

But vague generalities and empty, convictionless rhetoric just don't have that effect -- certainly not in the midst of a real, concrete national emergency.

How unmoored from reality are Obama and his top advisers to think that some pretty words with so little substance could accomplish so much? It makes me wonder: Was THAT ultimately the lesson they took from the 2008 campaign -- rather than that a nation was hungering for, you know, actual change?

And how much power do they invest in the trappings of the presidency, such that they thought the Oval Office setting would make his feeble call to action so commanding that it would suddenly, benevolently redirect the public's visceral outrage over the oil spewing from the sea floor, the perfidy of BP, and the sluggishness of the government response?

I don't blame the speechwriter. I blame Obama, or Rahm Emanuel, or David Axelrod, or whoever it was who ultimately decided that words, rather than action, were the best way to change the perception that the government isn't doing enough in the Gulf.

Eight weeks into an ongoing environmental disaster the likes of which this country has never seen, it was incumbent upon Obama to directly and specifically address some tough issues...

<snip>

More: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/16/obamas-speech-not-the-tur_n_614273.html

:shrug:

today with bp.

I just thought that his speech was flat, considering the circumstances.

And I worry that he is truly getting some bad advice, and might just be in a bubble within a bubble.

Time will tell... I still have some shards of hope left...

:shrug:

do. His actions today spoke volumes; that should also make people happy. Or more than likely not.

but upon close inspection it looks like just another empty promise.

At this time the total amount in said escrow account is zero.

So you're riding high on a promise from a corporate executive - one very unlikely to be enforced in court since Obama actually has no legal authority to demand anything from them - that could be rescinded or reneged upon at any time.

Better hold on tight, could be a bumpy ride.

the President of the US and the people in the gulf. That would do wonders for their image and business prospects.

They'd be toast.

Here's the fact sheet of things bp has agreed to:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x343055

Doesn't matter what they 'agreed' to do, it matters what they actually do.

Here's the record of what they have actually done:

- subverted and captured the regulatory process for their industry
- engaged in reckless risk taking, abandoning not only adherence to the law but also to any sort of sensible risk management
- killed 11 men in a rig explosion as a result of that recklessness
- tried to (and continue to) cover up the amount of the spill by dumping toxic dispersants... which then make the dispersed oil impossible to clean up
- engaged in a number of quick and dirty solutions that appear to have made the problem worse
- set up a call center than doesn't record its calls, as a placebo to claims makers
- insinuated that claims from Americans should be viewed skeptically by default
- engaged in a cover up along the beaches along with the Coast Guard (subverting our military) in order to prevent information about the extent of the damage from getting out
- tried to hide behind an outrageous $75 mil claims cap
- flew the flag of the Marshall Islands on said rig to evade US jurisdiction
...

Shall I continue?

If you want to take these guys at their word that's your prerogative, but I would dare to suggest that is not thinking sensibly about who and what we are dealing with.

Maybe the quid pro quo was no criminal charges. I don't know.

They do have other business interests around the world; maybe they're trying to save their reputation.

I'd say that ship has already sailed.




Any quid pro quo granting immunity from criminal charges would be illegal (not like this seems to matter to anyone anymore, but still).

it's not what he said, it's that he should not have said anything?

Oh my.

Maybe Froomkin should keep up.

:rofl:

Cause it reads ridiculous now.....in the light of that 20Billion with no caps + 100 million for unemployement compensation to all workers of all oil companies.....

sometimes it ain't what you say, it is the strategy that counts.

Seems like these Commentators have been hosed pretty good!

speech before slamming it. This happens to so many of the pundits and newspeople. They want to be the first to comment on a speech and end up not understanding a word that was said. It seems Obama is not acting rapidly. Froomkin doesn't understand words come before actions. I am sick to death of the pundits and newspersons. It is everyone for him/herself.

That the White House was set to announce that BP was 48 hours of securing 90% of all future oil flow from the riser pipe - in other words, the leak was plugged. And then the upward revision of oil leakage three hours before the speech shot that all to Hell.

That would have been the headline. The news media didn't get one and they're furious. Meanwhile, Obama cannot catch a break.

we want ACTION from you, dan froomkin! not just words!

:eyes:

He's paid for his opinion and analysis.

The President is paid for FAR MORE than that.

:shrug:

Some folks just haven't clued into that realty yet.

we're beyond the short bus, for sure.

:shrug:

:hi:

What gets done, gets done in private. The $20B fund set aside by BP was Obama's behind the scenes work.

There are no flight suits and landings on carriers

There are no photo-ops on top of 9/11 rubble

There is just what needs to be done, and what can be done

Obama is doing a good job

And we are going to see DADT repealed

Insurance will be more accessible

And he is absolutely right - do not let the perfect be the enemy of the possible

"What gets done, gets done in private."

Is the same old fucking paternalistic bullshit that tells me to believe that the people in power know what they are doing, and that the rest us us should just be good little girls and boys and trust them to take care of things.

Well.. I haven't trusted government since 1963, AND... that wasn't what Barack Obama promised us during his campaign to garner our votes.

There was this promise of transparency...

:shrug:

Transparency is never going to happen - I'm afraid

That doesn't diminish it's status as a noble goal, however

makes the change impossible.

:shrug:

That's a question coming up with some frequency, which indicates a growing degree insularity and group think- not characteristics one would like to see going into the next phases of this catastrophe and scandal.

This week's re-announcement of mineral wealth in Afghanistan led me to believe that the administration had finally gotten a handle on how to work the media proactively and head off problems down the line. Last night's effort shows us all that they still have much to learn.

For a first address about the crisis, people were expecting a frank discussion of it. How big is it? What's the extent of the damage? What specific steps have been taken to cap it? Have they worked? If not why? What future steps can we expect to be taken and what is the likelihood of success? Explain what's really going on down there. Has the casing been breached? What the significance of that? Are there leaks on the ocean floor other than at the main wellhead? Where? Is oil flowing toward the Keys and the Atlantic? Are there vast oil plumes? Where are they? Can they ever be cleaned up? Can the directional wells plug the leak? How many will need to be drilled? Lkelihood of success? What's the likelihood the gusher cannot be stopped? What are the effects on the environment and sealife? Are they permanent? How long will it take to heal? Can active cleanup do the job? Explain.

People were actually looking for technical data to help them understand what is going on. They received almost nothing.

Obama was not forthright in suggesting that all that is needed are adequate regulation and supervision and adequate safety practices. He failed to acknowledge that, even with the best practices, deep offshore drilling may pose risks that are unacceptable. And that we should consider a permanent moratorium.