posted October 12, 2009 09:07 PM         

******

Late-Night Comedians Turning on Obama
By Douglas J. Rowe
Sun Oct 11, 11:49 AM PDT

"That's pretty amazing, winning the Nobel Peace Prize," Jay Leno said Friday night of President Barack Obama's latest accolade. "Ironically, his biggest accomplishment as president so far ... winning the Nobel Peace Prize."

That joke may be indicative of the TV comedy world sharpening its arrows a bit more when the current occupant of the White House is the target, The New York Times reports.

President Barack Obama Awarded Nobel Peace Prize

The Times quotes Bob Lichter, who has tracked themes in late-night humor for 21 years, as saying "it will be telling to see how the comedians treat" the president's winning the peace prize: Is there now a caricature taking hold of a man more celebrated than accomplished?

Lichter, of George Mason University's Center for Media and Public Affairs, said it was too soon to tell whether the Oct. 3 Saturday Night Live skit suggesting that Obama has accomplished nothing is a "harbinger" or not. "The danger is that Mr. Obama is going to be defined by inaction and not living up to expectations," he said.

SNL skit: Obama has done nothing

SNL this weekend joined in the jokes about Obama not deserving the prize just yet, suggesting that honors like People's Sexiest Man designation may soon go to children.

Last week Jon Stewart continued with the "done nothing" theme on The Daily Show, chiding Obama for not yet getting around to reversing the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy about gays. He cited Obama's "full plate" of business.

Stewart then acted apoplectic, displaying his exasperation. "All that stuff you've been putting on your plate?" he said. "It's [expletive] chow time, brother. That's how you get things off your plate."

Ric Keller, a former Republican congressman from Florida who once wrote jokes for former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, told the Times: "There have been some clear shots coming across the bow from the comic left."

But Jeff Nussbaum, a Democratic speech and joke writer, disagreed that late-night comedy is a leading indicator of the zeitgeist. "To use an economic term, it is more of a lagging indicator," he said.

Those old enough to remember Watergate might recall that it took Johnny Carson awhile to start making jokes about President Richard Nixon and his connection to the break-in. But once the Tonight show host did, it felt like the beginning of the end for the U.S. leader who eventually resigned.
http://tv.yahoo.com/saturday-night-live/show/194/news/tv.tvguid e.com/latenight-comedians-turning-obama-20091011

******

posted October 12, 2009 10:06 PM         

quote:

---

"Of shoes, and ships, and ceiling-wax"

---

posted October 13, 2009 08:21 AM         

Hmmmm shura, I would rather you bury that sword in the barbarians at the gate.

SNL Rips Barack Obama for not Being a Socialist, But for Being a Do Nothing President … A Record of NOTHING!
http://scaredmonkeys.com/2009/10/04/snl-rips-barack-obama-for-not-being-a-socialist-but-for-being-a-do-nothing-president-a-record-of-nothing/

posted October 13, 2009 11:46 AM         

every once in a while jon stewert makes me laugh.

zala dear ... oh that reminds me of a song .... anyway, put the badge down. i sense you're getting too big for your britches. damn moderators.

posted October 13, 2009 06:19 PM         

quote:

---

zala dear ... oh that reminds me of a song

---

quote:

---

.... anyway, put the badge down. i sense you're getting too big for your britches. damn moderators.

---

posted October 13, 2009 07:58 PM         

zala dear, please take me home ....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnFeCex032g

or, if you enjoy watching large, sweaty, stoned men wearing dresses (and I would be the last person to argue with that particular predilection) ....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPOv3iyy1qo

posted October 15, 2009 12:30 AM         

Since Obama has been elected, he's reneged on his promise to withdraw troops (though he HAS decided to change the name to "trainers & advisers" so it APPEARS as if there's a troop withdrawal). The closest thing he's done to change things is promise to close down interrogation centers of suspected terrorists, and even that looks to be a will of the wisps meaning nothing, and even if he's telling the truth--which he only rarely does--also leaves open the standard practice of turning them over to OTHER governments to torture instead (who are said to be far worse than the US in their acts of torture). Meanwhile, troops have surged in Afghanistan and bombing campaigns have entered into Pakistan, whether or not Pakistan approves. Obama didn't hesitate against the Somalis either (though I think he acted appropriately in this case, I'm just saying he consistently displays the pattern of a war hawk who uses a big stick in preference to the olive branch). Also, Obama is making a noise over Iran very similar to Bush over Iraq. Yet, like Bush, he seems to have only a token interest in actually capturing Osama.

(Ironically, conservatives tend to approve of a war in Afghanistan while also giving credit to Reagan for winning the Cold War by letting the Soviets wear themselves out in military spending, especially in Afghanistan. I haven't quite figured that one out yet. But funny that in one of the rare few ways you can call Obama in line with Soviet Russia, and they get onto him for not being even more like the old Soviets. )

Plus, Obama chose William J. Lynn III for United States Deputy Secretary of Defense (ie, now running the Pentagon). Given that this man was, until confirmed, a lobbyist for Raytheon, one of THE biggest names in the military industrial complex, his choice (and the confirmation by Democrats) doesn't mesh well with Obama's promise to put the strictest limits on lobbyists than under any previous administration, nor his stated values of diplomacy over using the big stick.

Choosing Hillary, a major war hawk who has long wanted to strike Iran and urged her husband to declare war against the Taliban (over how women were treated) in the 90s doesn't make him look like a pacifist (though granted there are other likely reasons for Obama to add her to his cabinet, both noble and scheming).

Finally, ignore his speeches and look how he votes. His voting record (when not abstaining as he often does) overwhelmingly shows him to be a man who votes the opposite of what he claims to stand for, including when it comes to war. His disagreement with the war effort in Iraq (and only Iraq) was very brief, and been mostly supportive since then, that brief moment vastly overplayed by fans and foes alike.

And I'm not even going into other aspects, like Obama's continued support of Bush's Patriot Acts. Again, his speeches are adamant against warrantless wiretaps, but his vote always approves them. And though he claims to be for medical marijuana and letting states decide, the raids on marijuana clinics that intensified under Bush also continue unabated. And I'm getting depressed now so I'll stop, other than to say this is yet another reason why I think our species sucks.

Let's not forget that he snubbed the Dalai Lama, probably to stay in China's good graces (I really wonder if Bush wouuld've done that or not).

At least he's friendly to the 2A, no matter what many gun owners think (again, I'm judging by his recent actions & voting record rather than what he promised most of his supporters--at least some supporters out of one side of his mouth), so he's not all bad, IMO. But then, that's just one more reason for me to call him "Bushama."

Heck, just listen to his inauguration speech. So much in common with both Bushes inauguration speeches. (Ok, nearly all presidents give about the same speech...)

However, I will grant you that he's a more talented liar, seems to give a damn what people think of him (unlike Bush), and doesn't stick his foot in his mouth as often as Bush. OTOH, Bush did less for Enron than Obama has done for several corporations. But as I say, he's more LIKE Bush than not like him.

But then as a Russian told me regarding the "difference" between Obama & Bush, never underestimate the power of rebranding.

posted October 15, 2009 12:36 AM         

But nothing in there about empty rhetoric, or encouraging a president to live up to it. (Frankly, I don't see how a POTUS can even be eligible for it...). And with that in mind, a little parody of what else Obama has won:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31nqvyBTWis

Gods I needed that laugh.

posted October 16, 2009 10:49 AM         

Friday, October 16, 2009
Debacle in Moscow
by Charles Krauthammer

WASHINGTON -- About the only thing more comical than Barack Obama's Nobel Peace Prize was the reaction of those who deemed the award "premature," as if the brilliance of Obama's foreign policy is so self-evident and its success so assured that if only the Norway Five had waited a few years, his Nobel worthiness would have been universally acknowledged.

To believe this, you have to be a dreamy adolescent (preferably Scandinavian and a member of the Socialist International) or an indiscriminate imbiber of White House talking points. After all, this was precisely the spin on the president's various apology tours through Europe and the Middle East: National self-denigration -- excuse me, outreach and understanding -- is not meant to yield immediate results; it simply plants the seeds of good feeling from which foreign policy successes shall come.

Chauncey Gardiner could not have said it better. Well, at nine months, let's review.

What's come from Obama holding his tongue while Iranian demonstrators were being shot and from his recognizing the legitimacy of a thug regime illegitimately returned to power in a fraudulent election? Iran cracks down even more mercilessly on the opposition and races ahead with its nuclear program.

What's come from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton taking human rights off the table on a visit to China and from Obama's shameful refusal to see the Dalai Lama (a postponement, we are told). China hasn't moved an inch on North Korea, Iran or human rights. Indeed it's pushing with Russia to dethrone the dollar as the world's reserve currency.

What's come from the new-respect-for-Muslims Cairo speech and the unprecedented pressure on Israel for a total settlement freeze? "The settlement push backfired," reports The Washington Post, and Arab-Israeli peace prospects have "arguably regressed."

And what's come from Obama's single most dramatic foreign policy stroke -- the sudden abrogation of missile defense arrangements with Poland and the Czech Republic that Russia had virulently opposed? For the East Europeans it was a crushing blow, a gratuitous restoration of Russian influence over a region that thought it had regained independence under American protection.

But maybe not gratuitous. Surely we got something in return for selling out our friends. Some brilliant secret trade-off to get strong Russian support for stopping Iran from going nuclear before it's too late? Just wait and see, said administration officials, who then gleefully played up an oblique statement by President Dmitry Medvedev a week later as vindication of the missile defense betrayal.

The Russian statement was so equivocal that such a claim seemed a ridiculous stretch at the time. Well, Clinton went to Moscow this week to nail down the deal. What did she get?

"Russia Not Budging On Iran Sanctions: Clinton Unable to Sway Counterpart." Such was The Washington Post headline's succinct summary of the debacle.

Note how thoroughly Clinton was rebuffed. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov declared that "threats, sanctions and threats of pressure" are "counterproductive." Note: It's not just sanctions that are worse than useless, but even the threat of mere pressure.

It gets worse. Having failed to get any movement from the Russians, Clinton herself moved -- to accommodate the Russian position! Sanctions? What sanctions? "We are not at that point yet," she averred. "That is not a conclusion we have reached ... it is our preference that Iran work with the international community."

But wait a minute. Didn't Obama say in July that Iran had to show compliance by the G-20 summit in late September? And when that deadline passed, did he not then warn Iran that it would face "sanctions that have bite" and that it would have to take "a new course or face consequences"?

Gone with the wind. It's the U.S. that's now retreating from its already flimsy position of just three weeks ago. We're not doing sanctions now, you see. We're back to engagement. Just as the Russians suggest.

Henry Kissinger once said that the main job of Anatoly Dobrynin, the perennial Soviet ambassador to Washington, was to tell the Kremlin leadership that whenever they received a proposal from the United States that appeared disadvantageous to the United States, not to assume it was a trick.

posted October 19, 2009 11:27 AM         

are you saying that only those who insist we are always right are true americans jwhop?

posted October 19, 2009 12:42 PM         

quote:

---

“I fundamentally disagree with their view that the free market is the source of all ills,” he said. “Many of the protests are just directed generically at capitalism. ... One of the great things about the United States is you can speak your mind.”

---

quote:

---

But that same principle must apply to Muslim perceptions of America. Just as Muslims do not fit a crude stereotype, America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire. The United States has been one of the greatest sources of progress that the world has ever known. We were born out of revolution against an empire. We were founded upon the ideal that all are created equal, and we have shed blood and struggled for centuries to give meaning to those words - within our borders, and around the world. We are shaped by every culture, drawn from every end of the Earth, and dedicated to a simple concept: E pluribus unum: "Out of many, one."

Much has been made of the fact that an African-American with the name Barack Hussein Obama could be elected President. But my personal story is not so unique. The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores - that includes nearly seven million American Muslims in our country today who enjoy incomes and education that are higher than average.

---

That said, he does tend to fill his speeches with a lot of fluff, and more often than not his fluff says very little (just like so many other politicians) that it's all too easy to spin whatever you want out of it, which means a lot of people--fans & foes alike--do exactly that to find whatever it is they want to find in his speeches.

Oh, yes, for a little fun, the Daily Show on Obama's Inauguration Speech: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-january-20-2009/changefest--09---obama-s-inaugural-speech