Is a politician's mouth their worst enemy? Obama's comments . . .
By heathcliff
@heathcliff (1415)
United States
July 25, 2009 2:19pm CST
Despite how good he is in front of a camera, Obama opened his mouth on the subject of Dr. Gates' recent false arrest without carefully considering the power of a President's words. His quick work to cover the blunder was more in line with his mastery of media, but his mouth wasn't his best asset this week.
Is this an example of how difficult it is for politicans to choose the right words for some situations? Or, is it perhaps us, the over-reacting public, swept up in a Politically Correct mania, that needs to make some changes?
And, yes, by "mouth", I really mean that part of the brain that uses the mouth before the rest of the brain weighs in, so you could say, "a politician's brain is their worst enemy", but that seemed too vague (and too obvious
).
).1 person likes this
4 responses
@ravirai8616561 (824)
• India
26 Jul 09
i SOMEHOW AGREE TO THIS BUT THERE SHOULD BE SOME OTHER TOPIC THAN THIS.PEOPLE ARE AGAIN AND AGAIN BLAMING OBAMA WHICH I DON'T LIKE .HAVE SOMETHING ELSE TO DISCUSS IN POLITICS.
@heathcliff (1415)
• United States
26 Jul 09
People who have defended President Obama HAVE to make a stand against something like this, otherwise they're just as blind as those who attack him without cause.
Most people in politics and definitely anyone in The White House cannot be "left alone".
CONSTANT VIGIL!
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
26 Jul 09
I'd say given the last 20 years rather than last 8. Think about things like redefining the word "is". I think even further back than that Reagan might have once made a joke about nuking Russia when he thought a mic was turned off. I'm not sure of that, I just remember hearing it once.
@heathcliff (1415)
• United States
26 Jul 09
Reagan had some good ones. Most of us can probably relate though, it is just that politicians are under so much scrutiny, they might want to be more careful.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
26 Jul 09
I wonder how the Blowhard from Harvard would have reacted if he found out that his house was burglarized, then learned that the cops showed up and let the guy go because he said he lived there?
Without a teleprompter putting words in his mouth, Obama is a complete moron.
I pity any student who had to sit through the mumbling and "a..er"ing that must be the bulk of an Obama classroom lecture.
Waterboard me Anytime!
@heathcliff (1415)
• United States
26 Jul 09
We've got plenty of time to waterboard you after The New World Order solidifies, so you'll have to wait your turn!
You're right about the problem with your alternate siuation: How mad would Dr. Gates have been if the police let a criminal go because he sid it was his house!
I think a bigger question is: Would the President's answer have been different if the cops involved were all black or if Dr Gates was white? Would it have even been news? Would the President have even heard about it, much less felt he had to form an opinion.
So many people are too quick to care about an issue they can twist into racism and too ignorant of more important issues.
@Rollo1 (16679)
• Boston, Massachusetts
25 Jul 09
I think I would fault him for not being prepared with a non-answer, or perhaps his staff should be faulted. He obviously had heard of the incident, but knew little. However, knowing about it should have made him prepare to answer a question on it even if it was seemingly off-topic. When he said that he didn't know all the details, he should have stopped right there and capped it off with a "no comment".
I fault him also for the rush to judgment but aside from the very disturbing notion that our president would make decisions without knowing the facts, I think he showed a lack of professionalism in not preparing to avoid making a statement without knowing exactly what happened.
He was more circumspect in trying to take back his words, as they never neared a real apology or a retraction of his initial statement. The problem is that either he still believes what he said initially, or he can't admit being wrong. Neither of those is a good thing.
I think we would all like politicians better if they sometimes just admitted that they said something stupid. This might be easier if the public and the press weren't so quick to crucify. Maybe if we all afforded public figures the same right to be wrong that we ourselves claim at times, this would be easier for them.
But the bottom line is that "politician" is a job, too. And we expect certain things. We expect them to be able to give answers on their positions and explain them. A politician might get away with a "will have to get more information to make a decision" and they are better off not giving the quick, off-the-cuff answer because we will never let them forget something they do say. They have to know when not to say something and it seems Obama got a hard lesson in that this week.
@heathcliff (1415)
• United States
26 Jul 09
I think that last sentence says alot. President Obama is still a relatively young and inexperienced politician. We certainly have a right to expect our politicians at the highest levels to show a little more balance in their interprettations of "delicate" situations. Some even believe a President shouldn't have any agendas or leanings of their own so they'll be better peacemakers and compromise creators. Unfortunately for that line of thinking the country seems to want the President to be an emotional person capable of driving his or her own agenda. With that, statements like Obama's are bound to slip out.
