I agree. Great strategy and his has a media that supports him on it.

 

What will be interesting will be if the media follow a President that they did not support who uses the same strategy.

 

MSNBC usually shows everytime he speaks.

And at the beginning they showed every press conference that Gibbs had.

Fox does not show everytime Obama speaks.

 

Put a Republican in office in 2012 and it will be interesting if the roles reverse.

 

 

To be fair, the media loves Obama because he's made himself SO available to them. Find a Republican with that kind of attitude, and I'd say there'd be a good chance that he/she could compete. The media is fickle (sorry, members of the media). The want the big story, and love the guy who's accessible to them without making them feel he's doing them a favor.

I agree. Great strategy and his has a media that supports him on it.

 

What will be interesting will be if the media follow a President that they did not support who uses the same strategy.

 

MSNBC usually shows everytime he speaks.

And at the beginning they showed every press conference that Gibbs had.

Fox does not show everytime Obama speaks.

 

Put a Republican in office in 2012 and it will be interesting if the roles reverse.

During the Bush administration, every time he gave a "War on Terror" speech, Fox was there from start to finish.

 

If memory serves, MSNBC showed just about all of them, too, if not all of them. I can't speak for CNN, because I rarely watch it.

You had it the day he announced he was running for President.

 

My overload is seeing the umpteen dozen anti-Obama threads you've started ...

There's a very simple remedy for you available. Feel free to exercise it.

Obama is a brilliant politician and a very intelligent man. I don't agree with some of the stuff hes done or trying to do, but I think hes done a lot of good things too. Hes great at keeping the media on his side.

There's a very simple remedy for you available. Feel free to exercise it.

I may, I may not.

 

I just have this macabre fascination with seeing the paranoid view of things ...

During the Bush administration, every time he gave a "War on Terror" speech, Fox was there from start to finish.

 

If memory serves, MSNBC showed just about all of them, too, if not all of them. I can't speak for CNN, because I rarely watch it.

 

If you look at network coverage it's no contest. I remember the early study showing that Obama got more network time than Bush and Clinton combined in his first couple months in office. Obviously his position as first black president plays a role but the total was off the wall. It would be interesting to see what the numbers look like now after 8 months.

I may, I may not.

 

I just have this macabre fascination with seeing the paranoid view of things ...

:lol: So typical, question Obama and the name calling ensues.

Obama is merely using technology and media (all currently influential forms" to their fullest potential.

 

How is this any different from when presidents started using radio for regualr broadcasts? Granted, they may not have been daily. But today, everything is immediate, visual, and interactive. The web is the biggest presence out there, and TV still is strong.

TVs been around all my life, I sure don't remember any president besides Obama that's had such a love affair with the camera, and in such a short amount of time.

Obama is a brilliant politician and a very intelligent man. I don't agree with some of the stuff hes done or trying to do, but I think hes done a lot of good things too. Hes great at keeping the media on his side.

I agree he's a very good politician and very intelligent. I'm not sure what good things he's done thus far.

You know, I was relatively indifferent to this thread but for some reason the title keeps getting me.

 

Does anyone else think of a dental product when seeing "Celebr-ident?"

 

That just brought Jimmy Carter to mind. :lol:

I've spent all night and all morning looking for the anti-Ben Chandler thread. I spent a good deal of time looking for the anti-Mitch McConnell thread. I even tried to find an anti-Steve Brashear thread. But all I keep finding are these daily anti-Obama threads.

 

Seriously, the complaint in this thread is about the president making too many appearances. He's the president. He's pushing some ideas that he thinks the country would benefit from. He's attempting to counteract the misinformation his opponents are throwing out. You don't have to agree with him or even like him, but it's foolish to complain about him making appearances to talk to the American people. Especially if that's the only point of the thread. Because it looks petty and insignificant.

Feel free to start a thread on any of those you mentioned. Obama is the president, that's who's going to get the attention in P&R. Pretty logical, don't you think?

 

Pushing is a good term for what he's doing. I guess he figures if he repeats the same thing over and over and over people will buy it. Misinformation? It's not all misinformation my friend, it's also his fault there is misinformation to begin with as he's done a lousy job of making "his" plan clear. If you think the thread is about talking to the American people, you simply don't get it.

The only pettiness and insignificance I see are with those that can't handle Obama being questioned or disagreed with. I saw the same thing when Clinton was in office, but this is on a level like I've never seen before.

Feel free to start a thread on any of those you mentioned. Obama is the president, that's who's going to get the attention in P&R. Pretty logical, don't you think?

 

Pushing is a good term for what he's doing. I guess he figures if he repeats the same thing over and over and over people will buy it. Misinformation? It's not all misinformation my friend, it's also his fault there is misinformation to begin with as he's done a lousy job of making "his" plan clear. If you think the thread is about talking to the American people, you simply don't get it.

The only pettiness and insignificance I see are with those that can't handle Obama being questioned or disagreed with. I saw the same thing when Clinton was in office, but this is on a level like I've never seen before.

 

Certainly I agree that Obama would get more attention in P&R because he's the president. But isn't more than a bit ironic that a thread was started to discuss him getting too much attention?

 

Pushing is what he is doing and I'm not necessarily sure that there is anything wrong with that. Imagine if President Bush had went around the country speaking and appearing on TV shows prior to the invasion of Iraq. Might a more informed public (whether he was lying or not) have benefitted from hearing his reasoning on multiple occasions? Might all of Obama's appearances make us more informed (whether he is lying or not) and thus we would benefit from it?

 

As for pettiness and insignificance, I can handle all of the anti-Obama threads (or anti-anyone for that matter) if they include sound reasoning and worthwhile discussion topics. But when the opening post in the thread says this...

 

He's been on Leno, Letterman, Face the Nation, Meet the Press, Al Punto Con Jorge Ramos, CNN's State of the Union, ABC's This Week. He's been on prime time television several times already, on the radio numerous times. Is anyone else getting "Obama overload" besides me?

 

...I'm getting neither. And because of that, the thread comes off as petty (marked by or reflective of narrow interests and sympathies) and insignificant (not worth considering).

Certainly I agree that Obama would get more attention in P&R because he's the president. But isn't more than a bit ironic that a thread was started to discuss him getting too much attention?

 

Pushing is what he is doing and I'm not necessarily sure that there is anything wrong with that. Imagine if President Bush had went around the country speaking and appearing on TV shows prior to the invasion of Iraq. Might a more informed public (whether he was lying or not) have benefitted from hearing his reasoning on multiple occasions? Might all of Obama's appearances make us more informed (whether he is lying or not) and thus we would benefit from it?

 

As for pettiness and insignificance, I can handle all of the anti-Obama threads (or anti-anyone for that matter) if they include sound reasoning and worthwhile discussion topics. But when the opening post in the thread says this...

 

He's been on Leno, Letterman, Face the Nation, Meet the Press, Al Punto Con Jorge Ramos, CNN's State of the Union, ABC's This Week. He's been on prime time television several times already, on the radio numerous times. Is anyone else getting "Obama overload" besides me?

 

...I'm getting neither. And because of that, the thread comes off as petty (marked by or reflective of narrow interests and sympathies) and insignificant (not worth considering).

It's not that he's getting too much attention, it's that he's seeking to constantly be in front of a camera that bugs me.

 

No, Bush should not have went on Leno or Letterman and I'm glad he didn't.

 

:lol: You know, what I find funny is the fact that you and westsider have done nothing but complain about this thread and how it's petty and insignificant yet not only do you read it, you post in it. I find that disingenuous. I mean, really, when I find something on a board that's petty and insignificant, I just move on to a different thread. :idunno:

:lol: You know, what I find funny is the fact that you and westsider have done nothing but complain about this thread and how it's petty and insignificant yet not only do you read it, you post in it. I find that disingenuous. I mean, really, when I find something on a board that's petty and insignificant, I just move on to a different thread. :idunno:

 

I actually agree with this RTS. And honestly, I enjoy discussing these things with you. But I'll readily admit that I probably shouldn't care/post about any of this, if you would admit that these appearances aren't really that big of a deal.

I actually agree with this RTS. And honestly, I enjoy discussing these things with you. But I'll readily admit that I probably shouldn't care/post about any of this, if you would admit that these appearances aren't really that big of a deal.

:lol: Fair enough, I agree they're not a big deal, but it bugs me. I just don't like the approach he's using.

 

Since Mitch McConnell was mentioned, I was wondering what your thoughts on this might be: