Obama and Tough Questions
by Melvyn_Fein
November 25, 2011 01:53 PM | 2146 views | 4 4 comments | 72 72 recommendations | email to a friend | print | permalink

Have you noticed how Barack Obama responds to tough questions? (Did I say “have you noticed”? Oh, my gosh, I’m beginning to channel Andy Rooney.)

Anyway, until recently the press has avoided asking the president about anything that might prove awkward. For the most part committed to helping him succeed, its members have assiduously refrained from forcing him into a corner. Now, however, with the political season upon us, several have decided to breach their formerly unspoken code of etiquette.

We saw this change during the president’s Hawaiian press conference. Several of the queries aimed his way concerned our policy towardIran; especially with regard to intelligence that it is close to obtaining nuclear weapons. One pointed probe went so far as to ask if he had been able to enlist the cooperation ofRussiaandChinain reducing this threat.

The response was vintage Obama. He launched into a long soliloquy about all of his administration’s wonderful achievements in containingIran. It seems that everything he has done succeeded beyond anyone’s wildest hopes. Of course, there is more to be done, but this is merely a matter of sticking to the established course.

It was only in the last sentence or two that he actually addressed the issue of whether the Russians and Chinese agreed to cooperate with his strategy. At this point, he assured the nation that they had; that just as previously, they would in the future.

Except the very next day, the Russians insisted that they would not participate in any harsh sanctions against the Iranians. As far as they were concerned, more than enough was already being done.

In other words, Obama had obfuscated the question. He used his considerable verbal talents to deflect attention away from the crux of the problem, and then disingenuously asserted that it had been fixed in a way it had not.

Contrast this with the Republican debate that occurred last weekend. Romney, Gingrich, Bachmann, Cain, and Santorum were all asked what they would do about the Iranian situation. Each in turn forthrightly asserted that, in the end, they would not allow the Iranians to have the bomb. Even if this meant military action, they would take it.

The most ardent dissenter, of course, was Ron Paul. But he too was forthright. He did not mince words, but made it patently clear that he would not interfere withIran’s nuclear aspirations.

Obama is smart — but he is not similarly candid. When the answer to a question would be embarrassing, he does not answer. While he tries to leave the impression that he has, only his partisans are fooled — because they want to be.

Wouldn’t it be refreshing to have a president who is plainspoken and honest? Wouldn’t it be nice to have one who answers the questions he or she is asked? 

Comments-icon Post a Comment
Give me a break
November 19, 2011
It's easy for Republicans to be candid and ideologically pure on most issues because they live in a bubble.
Tyler Durden
November 18, 2011
Wow...way to oversimplify an issue.

Ever think that maybe it's difficult to speak to the media about talks you are having with foreign governments about extremely sensitive matters while they are going on? I was hoping this column wouldn't be another sophmoric, shallow, skin deep political blog (like that one the crazy repub wing nut does all the time) but alas, I was mistaken.
Cobb Mom
November 17, 2011
Yes Republicans, we need another war to suck the last remaining vestiges of any economic recovery from the US's dying hands. It is easy in a debate to talk tough about what you would do when you have never had the job or had to make the decision. I am not a Democrat by any stretch but this blogger's attitude and frogbreath's tunnel vision stupidity have insured I will never read this column again.
November 16, 2011
I would not describe Obama as smart as much as I would describe him as sly, crafty and sneaky. I would also challenge anyone to deny his intention to convert America to a Socialist country.

Those who would, either fail to recognize that they are socialistic themselves or really do not know what socialism is.
*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides