August 30th, 2010

E.J. Dionne explains that Obama hasn’t explained enough

Yes, here we go again. Dionne writes:

But Obama and his party are also in a hole because the president has chosen not to engage the nation in an extended dialogue about what holds all his achievements together, or why his attitude toward government makes more sense than the scattershot conservative attacks on everything Washington might do to improve the nation’s lot.

I thought the best way to prove this would be to show, not tell. And I have another question for Dionne: wouldn’t any such telling by Obama be an extended monologue with the nation, not a dialogue? I mean, isn’t a dialogue a back-and-forth between at least two people? How can the nation answer back?

Although I suppose it’s already sort of answered back through the mechanism of the falling polls.

28 Responses to “E.J. Dionne explains that Obama hasn’t explained enough”

  1. Occam's Beard Says:

    Yeah, that’s it, EJ, you nancyboy. We’re just too goddamned stupid to appreciate the Messiah’s wonderfulness. Hell, we don’t even deserve Him. After all, He is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I’ve ever known in my life.

  2. Occam's Beard Says:


    Oops. Sorry. Lost in a reverie there for a moment.

  3. PA Cat Says:

    I thought the best way to prove this would be to show, not tell.

    Well, Teh Won and Teh Missus have shown that they can’t figure out how to operate an umbrella:

  4. Stark Says:

    “Seen from the inside, the administration is an astonishing success”. Obviously E.J. Dionne has absolutely no grip on reality. Our country is experiencing political organ rejection, and he just thinks that the failing policies need to be sold better!

  5. Occam's Beard Says:

    “political organ rejection” – perfect turn of phrase.

    Shoddy product necessitates a hard sell.

  6. Harry the Extremist Says:

    Oh, I love the other tactic: The media elite telling us we’re to stupid to understand the great ones accomplishments.

  7. Gringo Says:

    Given all the speeches ∅ilbama has already given us, he has shown that he has gone above and beyond the call of duty on the monologue side. Regarding the dialogue side, I am reminded of President Nixon, a.k.a. Tricky Dick, going out one evening to talk with some of the Vietnam War protesters who had descended on Washington DC that weekend. Did ∅ilbama attempt to talk with any of the rally people this weekend, let alone watch any of the footage about it?

    ∅ilbama doesn’t do dialogue. He does “you are ignorant acting stupidly clinging to guns and religion and against freedom of religion and besides I WON” etc. He does talking down exceedingly well. Dialogue? We aren’t at his pay scale, so we don’t merit any dialogue.

  8. Paul_In_Houston Says:

    Although I suppose it’s already sort of answered back through the mechanism of the falling polls.

    So, I suppose Obama and his democrat henchmen will become the latest hunch of losers to claim, “I don’t pay any attention to polls.”

  9. Mr. Frank Says:

    There is a story about a dog food company that spent a great deal of money on an advertising campaign. When sales failed to move upward, the company CEO asked the advertising company what the problem was. He was told the dogs don’t like the dog food.

    Another speech won’t improve the dog food.

  10. Baklava Says:

    This column just after Hugh Hewitt interviewed E.J. extensively the other day.

    E.J. can’t even explain his OWN position very well.

  11. Baklava Says:

    And… I’m not just trying to shoot the messenger E.J.

    I’m saying the message you and ∅bama are trying to sell is horrible.

    Not well thought out.

    Lacking common sense.

    Without any basis in fact.


  12. Scott Says:

    Obama chose to ram healthcare down our throats, rather than listen to the people who who told hi they didn’t want it and instead wanted him to focus on policies that would generate economic growth and jobs.

    Since he failed to listen to us, I think alot of us are no longer listening to him.

    I’m sick of the condescension, the cheesy smirks, and the constant shifting of blame. I mute the TV every time Obama speaks now. He can talk to the hand.

  13. ghost707 Says:

    Robbing current and future private sector employees to pay off unions and provide democrat slush funds for campaigning is not an economic plan, it’s extortion at the point of a gun.

    That is the reason Obama does not want to talk about the economy – because the public has found out where all the money went.

  14. T Says:

    “. . .the president has chosen not to engage the nation in an extended dialogue about what holds all his achievements together. . . .”

    The links that hold his achievmemnts together is failure and overwhelming popular opposition.

    Now either Dionne knows this and is really, really disingenuous, or Dionne is really, really unformed.

  15. T Says:

    “are failure”


  16. Adrian Day Says:

    Monologue. The perfect word to describe the Obama Administration. As he plainly explained, he ignored 500,000 (350,000, 50,000, 20 depending on who’s reporting) people gathered in his neighborhood over the weekend. Last time he left town. THe elections over. We’ve had our dialogue, now it time to shut up, listen and worship at the feet of the master.

  17. Mike Mc. Says:


    Since he failed to listen to us, I think alot of us are no longer listening to him.


    Nor should anyone listen to him.

  18. alanstorm Says:

    If he wants to talk “about what holds all his achievements together”, he would have to concede that they all spring from socialist ideology – and the admin and media have been doing their best to downplay that.

    “…attacks on everything Washington might do to improve the nation’s lot.” What? they did something that might improve the nation’s lot? Oh, I see – they did something that they believed, against a century of evidence, would work.

    That’s not the same thing, and it deserves to be attacked as the expensive wishful thinking it is.

  19. kaba Says:

    I don’t care how good a car salesman he is; I ain’t gonna buy that 1982 Yugo.

  20. gs Says:

    Great piece by E.J. Dionne. He makes a number of terrific points.

    1. There are many other legislative and administrative actions that, in normal circumstances, would loom larger if these were not such exceptional — and difficult — times.

    Manifestly correct.

    2. It’s true that his accomplishments will have important long-term effects, even if they have not resolved the country’s central concern: the continuing sluggishness of the economy.

    True as far as it goes, but E.J. neglected to add that the continuing economic sluggishness is one of the important long-term effects (that is, until it is eclipsed by national bankruptcy).

    3. Obama should lay out, without equivocation or apology, where he is trying to move the country…

    Yes! Yes! Yes! Please oh please.

    4. …It’s just too bad he didn’t start earlier.

    Totally agree, because if he’d started earlier he’d still be voting ‘Present’ in the IL legislature.

  21. Occam's Beard Says:

    Obama should lay out, without equivocation or apology, where he is trying to move the country…

    Yeah, and as long as he’s coming clean …

  22. East Bay Jay Says:

    Isn’t a bad economy causing the public to forget about the health care and cap and trade issues a positive for Dems? It’s not like ‘winners’ are getting lost, where is the public behind Obama on anything? Okay, probably stupid slogans. Who can be against ‘hope and change’?

    Since ‘Yes We Can’ is used by both Obama and Bob the Builder, shouldn’t Obama have a similar handle? Barack the Business-killer?

  23. Tom Says:

    The scribes of the Left think to drown us with words.
    Got news for them: It ain’t gonna work.
    Two of my friends attended the Glenn Beck rally. Came back very inspired by the experience. They no longer feel like chips afloat in an ocean. We are out there in our millions, with our God and our Honor.
    The Ruling Class has earned the fear it feels.

  24. Richard Saunders Says:

    Occam’s Beard:

    Go on, Major Marco.

  25. waltj Says:

    No, E.J., we don’t need to have it explained to us again. It’s already been explained ad nauseam. We understand the program just fine. We just disagree with it. No matter how much lipstick you put on that pig, it’s still a pig.

  26. Daniel in Brookline Says:

    So, let me see if I get this straight —

    The President is in trouble, says Mr. Dionne, because he hasn’t explained himself well enough.

    Wasn’t that President Bush’s problem? And do you really want to claim that President Obama suffers from the inarticulateness that Bush was ridiculed for?

    Heck, Bush took responsibility for this. In his 2004 speech to the Republican Convention, he said, “I have my flaws. I mispronounce a fair number of words. I knew I was in trouble when Arnold Schwarzenegger started correcting me.”

    President Obama does this too… but have we ever heard him take responsibility for saying “corpseman”?

    In the end, this is a losing strategy. To make this claim, either the President didn’t explain himself well enough — which, as I said, makes him resemble his beloved predecessor — or The People aren’t smart enough to understand his explanations (and making that claim is a great way to lose mid-term elections, isn’t it?).

    Don’t forget to vote in November, folks!

    Daniel in Brookline

  27. IgotBupkis Says:

    > How can the nation answer back?

    Twice — First, on November 2nd, 2010, madame, in my hopeful opinion, with a nice big, hearty “Thank YOU, Mr. F***wad!!”

    And then we can seal the deal with another great, big, rousing “And We REALLY, REALLY mean it!!” on November 6, 2012.

    Yes, it’s an unfortunately very slow-moving dialogue, but it’s the one we’ve got.

  28. Jovita Cruz Quan Says:

    Obama’s cowering in a hole to shield him from the shelling that is going on, hoping maybe to get out when it dies down. Will it stop or slow down?

About Me

Previously a lifelong Democrat, born in New York and living in New England, surrounded by liberals on all sides, I've found myself slowly but surely leaving the fold and becoming that dread thing: a neocon.

Monthly Archives


Ace (bold)
AmericanDigest (writer’s digest)
AmericanThinker (thought full)
Anchoress (first things first)
AnnAlthouse (more than law)
AtlasShrugs (fearless)
AugeanStables (historian’s task)
Baldilocks (outspoken)
Barcepundit (theBrainInSpain)
Beldar (Texas lawman)
BelmontClub (deep thoughts)
Betsy’sPage (teach)
Bookworm (writingReader)
Breitbart (big)
ChicagoBoyz (boyz will be)
Contentions (CommentaryBlog)
DanielInVenezuela (against tyranny)
DeanEsmay (conservative liberal)
Donklephant (political chimera)
Dr.Helen (rights of man)
Dr.Sanity (thinking shrink)
DreamsToLightening (Asher)
EdDriscoll (market liberal)
Fausta’sBlog (opinionated)
GayPatriot (self-explanatory)
HadEnoughTherapy? (yep)
HotAir (a roomful)
InFromTheCold (once a spook)
InstaPundit (the hub)
JawaReport (the doctor is Rusty)
LegalInsurrection (law prof)
RedState (conservative)
Maggie’sFarm (centrist commune)
MelaniePhillips (formidable)
MerylYourish (centrist)
MichaelTotten (globetrotter)
MichaelYon (War Zones)
Michelle Malkin (clarion pen)
Michelle Obama's Mirror (reflections)
MudvilleGazette (milblog central)
NoPasaran! (behind French facade)
NormanGeras (principled leftist)
OneCosmos (Gagdad Bob’s blog)
PJMedia (comprehensive)
PointOfNoReturn (Jewish refugees)
Powerline (foursight)
ProteinWisdom (wiseguy)
QandO (neolibertarian)
RachelLucas (in Italy)
RogerL.Simon (PJ guy)
SecondDraft (be the judge)
SeekerBlog (inquiring minds)
SisterToldjah (she said)
Sisu (commentary plus cats)
Spengler (Goldman)
TheDoctorIsIn (indeed)
Tigerhawk (eclectic talk)
VictorDavisHanson (prof)
Vodkapundit (drinker-thinker)
Volokh (lawblog)
Zombie (alive)

Regent Badge