President Obama:- Calm in the eye of the storm

MORE

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2010/04/president_obama_calm_in_the_ey.html

Obama methodically made his case"

He rarely makes his case. He almost never faces anyone publicly who could argue against him. He makes speeches in which he address the critical points he wants to address, without ever taking on the hardest questions against his policy. The West Point address was probably the worst example of this where he had a captive audience that was forced, by law, not to object to anything he might say. As such, he could say anything without and immediate risk of opposition.

In private I'm sure it is different, although again because of the deference his office can demand, there is a limited number of people inside the bubble who can truly challenge him on his weakest points.

It's nothing new with presidents, and it is the standard hazard of the job. There aren't alot of opportunities to confront a president directly on their positions. The closest is the "joint press conference" that the presidential debates have become. There is the occasional (very occasional) one on one interview with some TV hack. But there are precious few who can truly challenge a knowledgeable president. The GOP showed their true stripes when, on two occasions, they had the opportunity to directly challenge the president on his health insurance positions, and instead they all punted and just postured. I suspect it was because 1) they had nothing and 2) they were afraid he might actually adopt something they proposed and then they'd have to defend it.

or the Health Care Summit with the Republicans?

As that poster put it.

The Republicans acted like moronic jackasses during the health care debate with stupid suggestions. Obama won by default. Their utter lack of intelligent dialogue *aided* Obama by making him look brilliant, no matter what he put forward, and no matter how he presented it.

Obama did a hell of a job diagnosing the state of health care in the US. But this wasn't a hard sell. Everyone and their dog already knows of the problems. As for his solution? Heh. It won by default in the face of idiotic suggestions from the right and suppressed dissent from the left.

... if you can FIND someone who as actually capable of arguing against the man effectively, we could sell it on Pay Per View, make us some money.

And Hillary doesn't count, we've already seen that match up.

Find enough and we could have our own "bum of the month" club. ;)

But the reality is, he doesn't want that. That would destroy the entire narrative that he is the smartest man in the room with the only plan. And its an easy narrative to put forth when the only people in the room against you are the extremists Republicans (while single-payer advocates are being dragged handcuffed away out in the hall)

I specifically mentioned that one, and how badly the blew it. They postured instead onf confronted (which, as I suggested, could have been a disaster for them because he might have actually done something they suggested and then they'd have to defend it.)

And he has never shyed from giving an interview to any news outlet. He has done multiple press conferences. He has debated the Republicans on their own turf and then debated them again with plenty of other Democrats sitting in the room. If you want to disagree on policy. Thats fine. But to say that he never engages himself in debate with people at all levels, in public settings, isn't just wrong, its an outright lie.

The referenced article was discussing many of his recent speeches he's given and used them as a basis for asserting that he "makes his case". The point I was making is that, since becoming president, he has not really done so. The singular opportunity was the two conferences with the GOP (upon which they took a huge pass, probably to their better). I specifically addressed presidential debates, and one on one interviews. I also mentioned the natural limitations that the office presents for actually doing this on any regular basis.

You might want to actually read and consider what I wrote before characterizing it as an "outright lie".

He has held townhall after townhall, press conference after press conference, has done interviews with aggressive interviewers. You can't really expect a President to put himself out there for the opportunity to be debated more than Obama has.

But one cannot simultaneously suggest he "makes his case" when he never publicly faces anyone in a position to force him to do so. It is the hazard of the job. A state of the union, or joint session of congress isn't such a situation, nor is a speech to a bunch of West Point Cadets, all examples listed in the original post. Even most town halls or press conferences are not a situation in which one is forced to "make their case". The president is in control, and can move the conversation around the room. An aggressive interview is fine if it is with someone in a position to actually challenge him on particular points, but he has seen few if any of those. There are few people in the world, especially in the press, who can match a knowledgeable president on a wide variety of subjects.

As I say, the vast majority of this is a hazard of the job, none the less, the OP assertion that he "makes his case" isn't consistent with the reality, especially within the context of actually being president, regardless of who you are.

FWIW, the place he has to "make his case" is basically with foreign leaders, and a few heads of congress such as Pelosi and Reid. Outside of that, as Carter learned, a presidents job typically isn't to "make his case" but to move things forward. He has staff and cabinet secretaries that make the case.