Friday, November 1, 2013

Three Options...

Fresh off the BLNN is this interesting story:

Obama's learning afterward about sensitive issues raises question about approach, inner circle
A string of embarrassing episodes for the Obama administration that the president didn't seem to know about until the public did is raising questions about why he wasn’t in the loop and who should have told him.
...
But reports over the past week weeks that President Obama was not aware of the National Security Agency monitoring German Chancellor Angela Merkel's cell phone nor of the technical problems that plagued the ObamaCare website ahead of its Oct. 1 launch suggests he is taking too much of hands-off approach or perhaps not surrounding himself with people who can keep him informed, critics say.
The way I see it, there are three possibilities, and none of them are terribly appealing. The first is that Obama just doesn't care - that he's not attending these briefings or tasking a staff member with keeping him up to date because it's just not important to him. That's bad. The second possibility is that Obama is being shielded from unpopular programs by his staff - the concept of "plausible deniability" - which makes sense given the nature of the programs about which Obama has claimed no knowledge.

You know, like Reagan and the whole Iran/Contra affair that resulted in a seven year long, $50 million investigation...

The third possibility, which is the worst IMHO, is that he has in fact been in the loop on these programs, has known about the spying, the failure of the healthcare website, the Tea Party targeting by the IRS, etc. and has done nothing to stop or even delay these programs. If in fact he's facilitating these sorts of programs and then claiming no knowledge, this would make Watergate look like a children's puppet show.

That is, of course, if we had a media fit to carry Woodward and Bernstein's athletic supporters, which we don't.

That is all.

4 comments:

eiaftinfo said...

Number 3 Jay, number 3 . . .

Anonymous said...

I'm inclined to one and part of two, at this moment. From what I've read about the POTUS's behavior in meetings, he sounds like he has no self discipline and possibly an attention deficit problem. He can't focus, but he looks and sounds good when he's on a script, so he's being run by "his" staff and advisers because 1) it's easier than trying to get him to stay on task, and 2) I'm not sure he's smart enough to keep up with the duties of the President.

LittleRed1

Daniel in Brookline said...

I don't see an inherent contradiction in "all of the above".

We know that the man can lie through his teeth, with a straight face, while staring you in the eye. We've seen him do it many times. We also know, based on his behavior, that he prefers fundraising, rabble-rousing, and golf to actual, you know, governing. And we also know that he's surrounded himself by yes-men who are afraid of him (or of Michelle, or of Valerie Jarrett).

Bodes well for the next three years, doesn't it?

Personally, I'd love to see someone at every press conference of his, from now to eternity, with a "LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE" picket sign -- or for someone to stand up, at every press conference, and call out "Mr. President, you lie!" But I don't see that happening.

mikee said...

You have to understand that those appointed by Obama don't need to coordinate their malfeasance with him - they know what is expected, and what they can do with their authority, to hamstring opponents and aid donors.

It is, and always has been, the Chicago way of doing politics.

The police beat officer taking drug dealer bribes doesn't report them to his captain, and he also isn't asked by the captain to arrest anyone else who is dealing drugs around that neighborhood. The Captains get paid off separately, discretely, to 86 incriminating reports or higher level crime, and everyone knows and does their job.

It is the Chicago way!