Jon Stewart to Obama: Your Legislative Agenda Felt Timid

[jefferson_dem]

Jon Stewart to Obama: Your Legislative Agenda Felt Timid
October 27, 2010 6:52 PM

From Jake Tapper and Sunlen Miller

As example of the president's supporters being unenthused, on The Daily Show comedian Jon Stewart called President Obama’s legislative agenda timid during an interview with the president set to air this evening.

“Is the difficulty you have here the distance between what you ran on and what you delivered?" Stewart asked. "You ran with such, if I may, audacity, yet legislatively it has felt timid at times. That I am not even sure at times what you want out of a health care bill.”

“Jon I love your show, but this is something where I have a profound disagreement with you,” Obama responded, “This notion that health care was timid – you’ve got 30 million people that will have health insurance because of this.”

At many other times throughout the course of the interview Stewart joked with the president, basically questioning where the mantle of change that the comedian and many Democrats voted for had gone, leaving the president on the defense.

“You ran on very high rhetoric, hope and change and the democrats this year seem to be running on please baby one more chance,” Stewart joked.

Stewart continued, back on health care.

“I don’t mean to lump you in with other presidents, but I think if I were to try to coalesce whatever criticism of it may be it’s that you ran on the idea that this system needed basic reform. It feels like some of the reforms that have been passed, like health care, have been done in a very political manner, that is papered over a foundation that is corrupt.”

Asked the humorist: “What have you done that we don’t know about? Are you planning a surprise party for us, filled with jobs and health care?”

-Jake Tapper and Sunlen Miller

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/10/jon-stewart-to-obama-your-legislative-agenda-felt-timid.html

More here - http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/27/obama-jon-stewart-and-change/?src=twt&twt=nytimes

[kayakjohnny]

1. Oh man. I just can't wait to see what becomes of this thread.

Thanks for finding and posting.

Cheers.

[jefferson_dem]

5. Yes, it's popcorn time.

Everyone knows i'm a kool-aid drinker (to go with the aforementioned popcorn) but I respect Stewart enough to hear him out. All the progressive accomplishments aside, this sounds like what could be fair criticism, at least insofar as some are feeling what Jon is saying. I'll be interested to see how POTUS handles it.

[emulatorloo]

18. Yeah, note that ABC/Trapper doesn't say too much about Obama's response.

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. Cannot wait!!!!

[xchrom]

3. 'Felt?' they passed Romney-care. What's to feel? Nt

[countrydad58]

37. They sure did.

[HipChick]

4. thanks for the reminder

[bigdarryl]

6. Jon Stewart is an ASS in my opinion

[Donnachaidh]

28. why? Because he spoke his mind and asked what lots of people have been saying?

:eyes:

:rofl:

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

71. No, because he and many so-called "Liberals" don't understand how politics works.

Furthermore, they don't understand that there has been a long list of accomplishments...

[dbmk]

89. Of course he understands it

Its intellectually dishonest to say that he does not understand the process or know the accomplishments. He obviously does. But his job is not to sit there and praise accomplishments.

It is his job to poke at the obvious differences between rhetoric and reality. And there Obama, like anyone else if not as egregious, has chinks in the armor that Stewart will sink his teeth into and ask Obama to explain it. Not to him (because he knows why) - but to his audience.

Jon Stewart showed once more that he is a better journalist than most other people running around claiming that title.

[gkhouston]

97. I would add that by openly addressing a lot of the criticisms that have been

circling throughout the blogosphere (and elsewhere, no doubt), Stewart is giving Obama a platform to address those issues. There are a lot of people who won't watch a speech (assuming the networks would even televise one in full) that will see this interview.

Doing this less than a week before the election is a gift to the country, IMO. Stewart asks some tough but fair questions. Obama gets to actually answer them. People are encouraged to vote, but how they vote and what they make of the President's answers is up to them. Isn't this the way we'd like our real journalists to behave?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

121. Look, I like Jon, but I had to stop watching his opening monologue

because the shit he would criticize Obama/Dems about, he had no clue about the fact that the Democrats NEVER enjoyed a majority. And when I hear people exclaim that they don't support the Dems anymore because they have a majority, it drives me up the fucking wall! There never was a majority!!! Not with LIEberman. Not with the likes of Max Baucus or Ben Nelson. Not with the other Blue Dogs like Blanche Lincoln.

Jon should know better. I can't go down the long list of outrageous statements he would, sounding like he has little grasp of how legislation is passed.

[BuelahWitch]

130. What? The Democrats never enjoyed a majority?

They only had one for the better part of the 20th century (1933-1981, then from 1987-1995), with extremely large majorities a great deal of the time.
Whether they were "enjoying" them or not, I have no idea, but they were the majority.

http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/history/one_item_and_teasers/partydiv.htm

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

135. Again, you can't read. We may have physically had MORE Democrats

but we had BLUE DOGS and DLCers working against the party's interests, either threatening to vote with Republicans or working hard to water down legislation.

To assert that ALL Democrats should have voted the same is simply ridiculous!!!

READ, PLEASE!!!

[BuelahWitch]

138. It appears you're the one who can't read

I said nothing about all Democrats voting the same way, I was just refuting what you said about Democrats never having a majority. They've had majorities for most of the past 80 years.
But if you're talking about THIS Congress, as the leader of the party President Obama should have been twisting arms to get Democrats to vote the way he wanted. He can do that, you know.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

140. Well, actually, they literally didn't. They had 57 seats, if you want to get technical about it.

Sanders, LIEberman, caucused with them. And LIEberman, more than once threatened to join the Republicans, especially with regard to the public option, so my argument stands.

You simply cannot comprehend the political reality of what really happened. While we may have had 60 votes in theory; in practice, that's not the case. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Tell you what. Since you're having so much trouble, I'm putting you on ignore...

BYE!!

[BuelahWitch]

141. Wow, put on ignore by an over emotional spinmeister

Whatever shall I do! :rofl:

[cherokeeprogressive]

136. So how did the party which has "NEVER enjoyed a majority" pass this thing called Health Care Reform?

[pokercat999]

107. Maybe he understands:

How the President and most congressional Dems work politics rather than how politics work. Why do we have to "work" politics like they've been "worked" in the past? I thought we were going to have CHANGE?

Change, I wonder what they meant?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

122. Because the Democratic Party is different from the Republican Party.

Because they don't compromise at all, the Democrats have to work together to reach some agreement. And that's primarily because we have many varied interests within the party.

People should stop claiming that we had the majority. We never did!!

[Ignis]

131. "People should stop claiming that we had the majority. We never did!!"

:rofl:

We had a mandate coming off a heavy-turnout GE and we had the majority in both houses.

All that was missing was the willpower to use it.

[Name removed]

133. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ignis]

142. It's not my job to enforce party/vote discipline in Congress.

I'm just a voter. :shrug:

Your assertion that we didn't have control of Congress remains an absurd one, by any objective standard.

But thanks for the personal attack in passing. :hi: Very civil.

[Jakes Progress]

118. Stewart isn't the one who doesn't understand.

A honeymoon wasted. 18 months of playing the conservative card over and over and over hoping that the next time it will make the republicans vote with us.

Presidents who understand how politics works get things done. Presidents who don't make tiny little attempts and only get stomped on.

People who understand demand that their leader smarten up. People who don't try to make failure look like accomplishment.

[alarimer]

134. These "accomplishments" are similar to NAFTA and welfare reform

in that they are Republican at the core. Health care "reform" was simply a giveaway to insurance corporations. The way to accomplish anything is not to begin from a compromised position. You start by asking for the moon (say, single-payer) and then compromise with the public option. You do not ditch the public option from the get-go.

[treestar]

114. Brace yourself, he is god here

Apparently if he were President, he'd have us that public option by now! He's so brave, you see!

Jon has the "guts" and the "courage" to tell us what he thinks every night on the teevee!

Sure he'd have made Lieberman sign a public option bill! Because he's so brave!

[jefferson_dem]

7. Pool report here -

http://blogs.ajc.com/jamie-dupree-washington-insider/2010/10/27/obama-daily-show/

[Beartracks]

73. The pool didn't get the bit about the Rally...

... to Restore Sanity? WTF??

-----------------------------------

[Uzybone]

8. Like I do every day, I'll watch the show

[ProSense]

9. Yeah,

timid and historic.


See this is the kind of bullshit the President has to deal with while people sit around and wonder why Americans are so confused.

"You ran with such, if I may, audacity, yet legislatively it has felt timid at times...I don’t mean to lump you in with other presidents, but I think if I were to try to coalesce whatever criticism of it may be it’s that you ran on the idea that this system needed basic reform. It feels like some of the reforms that have been passed, like health care, have been done in a very political manner, that is papered over a foundation that is corrupt."

Opinions are easy to form. They don't have to be backed up by facts: Obama's agenda is timid (compared to what, his rhetoric?).

So what if you passed health care reform when seven other Presidents failed to do so, you did it in a "political manner that is papered over a foundation that is corrupt."

What the hell does that mean? When Clinton tried to pass health care reform, it didn't dismantle the system, and the current plan includes a lot more specific reforms and does a lot more to combat fraud, and it passed.

Wall Street reform, including the consumer bureau, is timid (compared to what, an ideal?)

[vaberella]

11. Amen. Stewart seems to have very narrowed vision. n/t

[TheKentuckian]

104. Timid in comparison to the problems that need solving.

[tularetom]

10. ABC news gleefully reports Stewart giving Obama a ration of shit

But do they utter a peep whenever he skewers some right wing asswipe?

Do they say anything when he exposes the hypocrisy of the liberal media?

Nope, then they are mute.

I'm not criticizing Jon Stewart, he asked perfectly valid questions, but it's tragic when the entire news business in this country fails to do their job.

[emulatorloo]

16. Agreed, Jake Trapper is the worst. Additionally I want to see the show for myself,

I don't trust Trapper's spin.

[vaberella]

12. Why does the writer keep saying "joking"--obviously Stewart was not. n/t

[Donnachaidh]

32. have YOU seen the show yet?

it hasn't been BROADCAST yet. Far too early for bunched panties. :eyes:

[vaberella]

80. I have watched the show in the past.

Realistically Jon Stewart was not joking. In the past when he's targeted the President for criticism, his jokes don't sound like jokes and you can even hear the audience falter. He's in full seriousness of delivery. Plus the questions asked and the responses by Obama---ie the use of "timid" would suggest this is far from a joke. Do you get my point?! By profession he might be a comedian, his commentary at times might be comedy--especially towards Republicans. But when speaking to or about the President, he's rarely joking.

[ibegurpard]

13. Excellent observation by Stewart:

“I don’t mean to lump you in with other presidents, but I think if I were to try to coalesce whatever criticism of it may be it’s that you ran on the idea that this system needed basic reform. It feels like some of the reforms that have been passed, like health care, have been done in a very political manner, that is papered over a foundation that is corrupt.”

[emilyg]

14. Yes.

[vi5]

17. That's the big, great point....

Everything he has done has been built on a broken foundation. Not the least of which is the fact that everything he has undertaken has been rooted in the belief that supply side economics is proven fact and that it works and that everything that is done must be tied to preserving that as a basic tenet of American life. And as such every reform has about a million loopholes that the wealthy and the corporations can drive their money trucks through while at the same time continuing to put the burden on ordinary citizens.

[truedelphi]

119. + My household.

[ProSense]

20. Yeah, it's called

say anything.

[ibegurpard]

21. I already read that response in this thread and dismissed it

you didn't need to go to the trouble of making a link to it

[ProSense]

24. Of course,

facts don't matter.

[ibegurpard]

25. opinions are not facts

nor is spin

[ProSense]

26. The President's achievements and policies are not opinions. For example,:

this is a law, not an opinion: Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010

[ibegurpard]

27. if that were true there wouldn't be any arguments would there?

[ProSense]

30. By that logic,

why are there arguments with Republicans?

Opinions differ, but facts are facts.

[ibegurpard]

33. Fact: Democrats passed a law dealing with healthcare

Opinion: it was a good law

Clear?

[ProSense]

36. Fact: Health care reform is the law

Opinion: Boo

Get it?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

50. you really don't understand how this works, do you?

You can gnash your teeth and hold your breath and still, no matter what you think, and in fact, no matter what the objective truth, there's a perception out there. That perception is what the president needs to overcome, and your admonishment of posters on DU won't do a single thing to change that perception. So go back to covering your ears and chanting "I'm right" over and over again, like you're effectively doing now, and see where that lands you.

[ProSense]

52. "there's a perception out there"

There is perception out there that Republicans are better on national security.

You seem to want to conform reality to perception instead of changing perception to match reality.

"Your admonishment of posters on DU won't do a single thing to change that perception. So go back to covering your ears and chanting "I'm right" over and over again, like you're effectively doing now, and see where that lands you."

You're projecting.

[quakerboy]

69. speaking of which

lets see what there is to say next Wednsday. I guess that will be rubber meeting the road to figure out exactly who has been covering their ears and ignoring reality.

Then again more likely everyone will claim the results validate their particular beliefs, and keep on believing what they want.

[glitch]

39. That is so perfectly said. I hope Obama listens to him. He could still be great.

"papered over a foundation that is corrupt"

[vaberella]

81. If the guy is a joking and is a comedian as the article pushes, why does Obama have to listen?

Not to mention Obama already clearly stated he watched the show. Maybe some people should take the time out to listen to Obama....don't you think?

[whatchamacallit]

42. Nail meet hammer

[treestar]

110. A political manner?

It's politics, what else would it be?

There is no evidence of any corruption of any kind. Stupid, irresponsible crap.

[Politicalboi]

15. Is this going to be on tonight?

[jenmito]

23. Yup.

[Dr.Phool]

19. "Mr. Stewart, your place under the bus is ready!"

[Better Believe It]

22. At the count of three push .... and unrecommend of course!

[Donnachaidh]

35. guess we all need to establish the big tent under the bus, huh?

Because the naysayers who are having kittens over a show that has NOT been broadcast yet certainly don't know (or refuse to believe in) Big Tent values.

PARTY under the bus y'all!

[jefferson_dem]

34. Oh please...

Throw that "under the bus" metaphor under the bus already. That shit was old ... like way way back.

[ibegurpard]

38. yeah, kind of like "you want change overnight"

and all that shit

[ProSense]

44. Yeah, and

some think people are voting Republican because the pace of change was too slow.

[jefferson_dem]

45. Not at all.

At least that has some plausible substance. The bus thing is just stupid.

[Dr.Phool]

67. Throwing every dissident under it is even stupider.

[Bluenorthwest]

105. The bus thing is just accurate, and you tire of it because it is

too often exactingly applicable. Stupid is claiming an invisible power tells you your neighbors should not have rights. Stupid is as stupid does.

[Ignis]

132. Those not under the bus tend to think it's not so bad down there.

:shrug:

[gulliver]

29. I have it recorded and will watch it later.

The ABC account is not very well written, content aside, so I am wondering whether they didn't just completely blow it. I expected Stewart would be critical of Obama, but the ABC blog makes it sound like Obama didn't have much to say for himself. That I wouldn't expect.

[elizm]

48. It hasn't been shown yet. It is on tonight. nt

[gulliver]

49. I guess I recorded the wrong show!

Thanks!

[BeyondGeography]

31. It was anything but timid

Just ask the corporations that are pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into rethug coffers.

The left says he didn't do enough. The right says he did too much.

The left says he was too conciliatory. The MSM says he was excessively partisan.

Etc., etc.

[countrydad58]

41. Obama

Is a very poor negotiator. He would make a piss poor car salesman!

[BeyondGeography]

43. Yeah, we need a better car salesman for Prez

:dunce:

[countrydad58]

54. analogy.

I want a President to stop bending over to the detriment of the country to a bunch of Fascists. Health care was bartered away to big insurance & Pharma . The uninsured have to wait 4 years to be covered? Why? Even the pukes fucking vouchers plan is better than this gun to the head mandated BS!

[cleanhippie]

78. Profile turned off, PM's turned off, and subtle RW talking points.

Interesting.

[JTFrog]

85. Subtle?

:spray:

[countrydad58]

86. I have been

a reader of DU since Jan 2001, When watching the criminals coronation on TV. When someone was holding a sign in the demonstration of the coup Democratic underground.com So a low post count brings you to what conclusion? How long have you been here?

[RichGirl]

95. So you've been reading for almost ten years....

...eight of those years with Bush who very nearly destroyed this country...and yet, you had nothing much to say. Now, with a Democratic president...you find your voice.

[cleanhippie]

99. Feeling guilty? I made no mention at all about your post count.

Doing so is against the rules.

I stated exactly what I found interesting, YOU brought up post counts and time on DU, not me.

So whats with the RW talking points?

[countrydad58]

100. Because as a long time reader

this is always the strawman used; post counts. Yes I got my voice. I despised Bush & that opinion was pretty well shared here! I( voted happily for Obama, But yes I am severly disappointed in his Presidency so far. I hope He succeeds going further for all our futures! I also noticed that unlike the unamity against Bush, Now some of the same policies that everyone despised, some here choose to look the other way or make excuses.

[cleanhippie]

103. As a "long time reader', how come you didn't read my post thoroughly the first time?

Before you accused me of making claims and comments I did not make?

[RichGirl]

94. Oh please....

Why is it that republicans, or should I say, teabaggers think that they can sound like a liberal just by calling themselves "pukes". Lesson here...we are the intelligent party, we don't use the word "puke". And, we know the definition of fascism. Look it up. While your at it, look up socialism, Marxism, Communism. You might be surprised to discover that they aren't inter-changeable. They are three different concepts.

[jefferson_dem]

46. A car salesman?

Really? That's what you want?

... Sorry, I call bullshit on you.

[MadMaddie]

57. President Obama signed thebill

The Negotiations happened in the Senate and the House. Harry Reid is the failure here. I want Harry to win but he needs to be replaced in his role as Leader.

[cleanhippie]

77. Well, thank you for that highly enlightened opinion.

You seem to have a very strong grasp on, well, something.

[Phx_Dem]

116. No kidding! +1000

[Aramchek]

40. It's easy for Jon to bitch, he doesn't have to DO anything

[Kdillard]

53. Yep.

[quakerboy]

72. Although true

that does not make any points he may have made any less relevant.

[treestar]

111. Exactly!

Let him try. He could not get elected to the state house. Running one's mouth is easy.

[jenmito]

47. So he was harder on Obama than on Condoleezza Rice? n/t

[Tarheel_Dem]

51. Sorry Jon. Still love you, but you've adopted some lame ass talking points,

from the perpetually discontented left. It's a good thing I gave up all the talking head shows, even Jon, shortly after the election. I'm not sure why all progressives think they have to take their lead ("talking points") from Jane Hamster, but the rhetoric from the further reaches of the left, just don't match up.

I'm sure Jon's biggest concern was that he not be accused of softballing an interview, with the Prez, by Fox News and Arianna. :eyes:

[impik]

55. Did the president answer any of these, or JS talked to himself?

Fuck Jake Tapper and Sunlen Miller.

[alcibiades_mystery]

56. Jake Tapper is a conservative tool

He got his Republican wings by tagging Gore as a "serial exaggerator" in the 2000 campaign, and his rhetoric has been nothing but contempt for Democratic candidates ever since. The guy is not a serious journalist. He's pure propaganda.

[emulatorloo]

75. Tapper writes as if Obama just sat there, silent. It was a great interview, a great dialog

Can't stand Tapper.

[dbmk]

91. My thoughts exactly

Both came out of that interview as winners in my book.

Jon Stewart was sufficiently confrontational, while not being disagreeable. He was not there to pat the President on the back. People need to understand that he is not necessarily asking from his own point of view - but picking from the criticism where there are legitimate gaps between rhetoric and reality. And giving Obama a chance to explain himself in a relatively friendly setting.

Both did an excellent job.

[MyNameIsKhan]

58. I think JS could have asked Question differently, but here is the thing

I was quite disappointed when Public Option was dropped, that was the key for HCR. I have come to agreement that this is the best the country can do, but I was looking for Pres Obama to take public charge against LIEberman.

The idea of dropping medicare age to 55 was a awesome compromise. That too was killed by LIEberman one Sunday.

So yes his agenda felt timid, ...sometimes, but does it take away his achievement that are more centrist, No way. He has done for this country in 2 years that will reverberate for next decades.

[Safetykitten]

59. "30 million people that will have health insurance because of this"

Can someone please explain this number?

[Thrill]

60. Perfect example of Republican schill Tapper

Taking bits of an interview and trying to spin it as a negative interview. When it was just the opposite.

[jenmito]

61. Yup. I'm thinking the same thing watching it myself. n/t

[elleng]

62. FABULOUS interview, FABULOUS President,

and I sure hope DUers AND Dems AND Indies understand this!

'Its not gonna happen overnight.'

(after WATCHING the show)

[RichGirl]

92. Agreed!!

I love Jon Stewart and love President Obama more.

Most of us support the president, know that it's a really tough job, at a very tough time and with opposition the likes of which we have never seen. We will go to the polls next Tuesday and vote for whoever has a (D) next to their name. But there are also dems/indies who wanted/expected more and are unenthusiastic about this election and may have stayed home. Stewart spoke for them, asked their questions and Obama got to answer in his intelligent, thoughtful way. Something like this could turn the election in our favor.

[elleng]

101. Sure hope that it would, but wonder how many of the unenthusiastic listened.

And hope that 'unenthusiastic' DUers 'get it' now. (If not now, when?)

Thanks, RichG!

[gulliver]

63. Lots of thunderous applause. No boos.

Great performance by Obama. Audience loved him. Stewart appropriately tough and respectable. Fantastic show.

[fishwax]

64. that interview was great fun to watch

:toast:

[young but wise]

65. Tapper is an asshole.

The interview went nothing like what he reported.

[FrenchieCat]

76. If you had caught him on Bill Maher just this weekend,

you'd have seen how big of an asshole he really is.
He was making excuses for the Republicans.....
when he's "supposed" to be impartial.

[ThomCat]

66. Why that damned passive voice?

It felt timid at times? No, it was timid! It produced lackluster results. It wasn't enough.


And the response, 30 million people on health care is an evasion. It's 20 million people able to spend money on insurance. Insurance they might not be able to afford to use because of the rising costs of insurance and health care. And yet he still mentions this 30 million as if that was what was promised. As if that was ALL that was promised.

We were promised health care for All Americans. We were promised Lower Costs for Health care for All Americans. We were also promised hard caps on CO2 emissions. WE were also promised DOMA and DADT would be a thing of the past. We were promised that NAFTA would be renegotiated to include environmental and labor protections.

Were are any of those things? Were are any mention of any of those things, ever?

30 million people with new expensive insurance policies was not supposed to be the new wonderful thing.

[Dr.Phool]

68. They should invite Colbert to do the next White House Corespondents dinner!

[quakerboy]

70. I like me some Stewart. I like me some Obama. Put em together

and its must watch in my opinion. I hope that the President was listening as well as talking, even though he is in a much greater position. I am sure that Stewart was, but his role is the comic and the sardonic.

[Jennicut]

90. Exactly. I like them both. I really want to see it.

[emulatorloo]

74. Just watched the interview - Jake Tapper is full of bullshit spin.

Excellent interview,

Tapper acts like Obama just sat there and didn't say anything.

[JoePhilly]

87. Tapper will be on TV later this week telling us Obama's efforts have "gone too far"

[BeyondGeography]

124. ...and were conducted in an excessively partisan manner

:silly:

[CakeGrrl]

79. Easy to make it look like a Stewart smackdown when you don't

include the President's responses.

Tapper's a jackass per norm.

:rofl:

[vaberella]

82. Seems as though many agreed with Tapper early on in the thread. n/t

[LawnLover]

83. This article seems to avoid Obama's answers

which, to my mind, were all pretty damn good. It was a great interview -- Stewart was tough -- but Obama matched him with intelligence and candor.

[vaberella]

84. Some of the posters agreed with the direction of this article. n/t

[ampad]

96. Yea I guess they did not watch it

I watched it last night. There was a moment when president Obama said it is change you can believe in not change in 18 months. The crowd went crazy on that one and Stewart was the one to back down. Also when president Obama was talking about the healthcare law and all that he has done. Talked about how it was a foundation and you have to build on it. Much like during the civil rights movement people were legally allowed to vote but of course there were people who were kept from voting. Not to mention the civil rights movement did not happen overnight. I like the way the president put it together like that because I see quite a few people comparing healthcare reform, DADT, DOMA to the civil rights movement in regards to importance. Yet the comparison stops there. No mention of how long it took, no mention of the fact that while the civil rights movement may have ended; that some AA are still kept from voting due to systematic racism. I am so happy that the president put that out there because it needed to be said.

[LawnLover]

108. This is something I've been saying for a while

but they naysayers don't want to hear it. If it isn't done NOW, apparently it isn't worth doing.

[nxylas]

88. And there's the rub

I haven't seen the interview (I have neither a TV nor a broadband connection at the moment), but based on what I've read, it sounds like Stewart was doing what an interviewer is supposed to do, namely ask the questions that a lot of people would like to ask, while Obama gave as good as he got. No acting like a moose caught in headlights when asked a softball question like "what newspapers do you read?" (and then whining about media persecution) for him.

[dbmk]

93. You pretty much have it down.

Stewart did his job - better than many who would claim to be more "serious" journalists.

[tammywammy]

98. I watched this exchange last night

And I rarely watch TDS. Anywho, I thought John's question was good and phrased well, and I though the President's reply was excellent too.

I thought it was a good interview, and I'll admit I missed the beginning of it.

[PVnRT]

102. I see many of the usual suspects are here

Ready and willing to tear Stewart's throat out for not doing a softball interview. How dare he!

[nxylas]

112. Yeah, evidently they want a repeat of his cringe-making interview with John Kerry

*shudder*

[treestar]

113. Asking the "hard" questions like Sarah Palin would, eh?

If he were really "tough" John could have just asked him why he's such a "coward."

I'm glad the President answered that question well. I'm sick of any words that have to do with purported lack of "bravery." It's so right wing, to be obsessed with that stuff. It's not a matter of "bravery" to ask that legislation be passed, to get the best legislation you can is all you can do, regardless of "courage."

[bluedigger]

106. Why depend on somebody else's opinion?

It will be rerun several times today, and probably more over the weekend. IMO (:rofl:) Stewart gave the President the opportunity to defend his record, while touching on some common complaints. He was fair, and allowed the President to respond at length, with few interruptions. The President met the challenge well, while showing an appreciation both for Stewart's humor, and his doubts. It was a solid job on all parts.

[jefferson_dem]

117. I posted this yesterday before the program had aired.

Leaks.... That's all.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

109. I don't believe that Obama's legislative agenda was *timid*

Disclaimer: I have not seen the interview so I am only responding to what I've read about it so far.

Fighting for health care reform and succeeding in FINALLY getting something through was NOT "timid" IMHO. Many people here and elsewhere don't like the final product of course, but he did have the audacity to make another go with a legislative initiative that nearly ruined Clinton's Presidency in its first tem and was never successfully attained by any other previous Presidents and Congresses. I should point out too that- after Scott Brown's election to Kennedy's former Senate seat- Obama was encouraged by aides to timidly shelve comprehensive reform and go for something smaller and some might say, more "timid". Well, he didn't take that advice and got something more passed. Also, if anybody paid attention to what he said during the lead-up to passing HCR, he never said that this was going to be the end all-be all of HCR.

Getting financial reform passed WITH the creation of a brand new federal agency overlooking financial matters is hardly what I would call, "timid".

He's laid the groundwork for ending DADT. It has yet to be repealed (by Congress) but there is a good likelihood that it will fall soon as well.

Everything that he's gotten passed, did so with a solid (or nearly solid) wall of Republican opposition and use of every conceivable parliamentary trick in their arsenal.

If what he has accomplished (or attempted to accomplish) so far is considered "timid", then.............what exactly would be considered "bold"? :shrug:

[Phx_Dem]

115. I laughed out loud when Stewart said that! Timid?! ROLF

[Kweli4Real]

120. From the few lines presented ...

President Obama handled himself well. However, I do wish he had responded to the lack of fundamental change thing by reminding Daily (and his audience, present company included) that he was elected president ... not king or dictator, and has to work within the reality and structure of the present system.

[truedelphi]

123. Well, there have been other Democratic Presidents who also had to

Work within the reality and structure of the present system.

But the problem is that Obama is either aligned with forces of darkness, or else he wants to be "liked" much more than to do the right thing.

How can Obama even say that 30 million people now have health care insurance that didn't have it before? For every person who now has health care they didn't have before his term of office, there are at least 1.5 people who cannot get health care because the uptick in their premiums and their co pays and their deductibles mean that they cannot afford to use what their insurance premiums should be giving them.

If only Obama had spent as much time reading about FDR, rather than Lincoln. After all, it is FDR who gave speeches saying that he welcomed the hatred of the banking elite. Or if only Obama spent time reading about LBJ, who went forward with a Civil Rights bill that was not compromised by LBJ getting all warm, friendly and "bipartisian" with segregationists.

Our Dem majority and our Dem president are far too willing to have as their major talking point "We cannot afford to upset the Republicans." Fact of the matter is, by playing that as the "reality," so they ignore (and/or pretend) that the reality of how the Republicans represent only 23% of the voters, and the majority of Americans wanted Obama to not be tied so tightly to his Big Wall Street Buddies like Geithner, or his Big Insurance Buddies like the head of UnitedHealth.

[ProSense]

125. Hmmmm?

"there have been other Democratic Presidents who also had to Work within the reality and structure of the present system.

But the problem is that Obama is either aligned with forces of darkness, or else he wants to be "liked" much more than to do the right thing."

Unlike all the other Democratic Presidents, Obama either sides with evil or is unwilling to do the right thing?

Seriously, WTF?

[Milo_Bloom]

143. Pretty accurate statement.

[BklnDem75]

128. Wow...

'the problem is that Obama is either aligned with forces of darkness, or else he wants to be "liked" much more than to do the right thing'

Thanks for letting us know Obama can do no right in your eyes.

[truedelphi]

129. Hey I give him credit for the stem cell approval.

And for the fact that at least so far, no bombs have fallen on Iran.

but as far as almost every other one of his pledges, he either forgot what he said, or he "softened" his position so much it is meaningless.

I mean, I have health insurance, but it is through the County. So when I need a specialist, I have to wait nine months. (For many conditions, waiting nine months can be a death sentence.)

I cannot find employment as I have been told to my face that my age indicates whatever person at the agency where I am placing my application would make the hiring decision while factoring in the huge premiums necessary to keep my 58 year old body insured. But because of the "give aways" to the Health insuring industry, that premium uptick is mandated. An agency can either employ me or hire a younger, less expensive person.

It is much easier to like Obama if you have a job, decent insurance, your teeth are not hurting all the time, and you think that your situation will continue to be prosperous. For those of us who fall into the "new holocaust demographics" that is, those of us who are fifty years plus, it is not easy to like this man. Especially given how Fourteen trillion bucks went from the Geithner/Bernanke(Paulson) folks to the Inner Circle of Wealth of Wall Street. And those who received the monies are not lending it out to those in the Middle Class. While we go into the future, jobless, without real heath care, and in many cases, homeless.



When we realize that Obama forgot overnight his pledge to end NAFTA and instead appointed the Clinton "Go To" guy on NAFTA to the post of Chief of Staff (Rahm Emanuel.)

Of course, many on this board don't mind that the DLC Democrats are just what Republicans used to be. And they are so happy that these "New Dems" are not the outright fascists that the RW people are that they refuse to remember what being a Democrat really meant, back in former times.

[hulka38]

126. It's good to know that John has privately come to the same conclusions

that many of us reluctantly have.

[kjackson227]

127. Stewart has his opinion, and I have mine...

and my opinion is, President Obama should've done Leno. Wasn't much of a Stewart fan before, and certainly not after.

[cherokeeprogressive]

137. My favorite part: "we have done things that some folks don’t even know about "

Stewart: What have you done that we don’t know about? Are you planning a surprise party for us? “Filled with jobs and healthcare!”

[boppers]

139. Tapper butchered the context and re-ordered the narrative.

Hint: The "lump you in" line was a joke, based on Stewart being lumped in with pundits by Obama. Sure can't tell that from this selective edit. Oh, and the surprise party joke was at the beginning, not at the end.