Obama on "This Week": Everybody Has to Give

President Elect Barack Obama will be on ABC's "This Week" with George Stephanopoulos this morning. What's hegoing to say?

[F]ixing our economy over the long term will require sacrifice from every American and scaling back some of his campaign promises.

Or in Obama's words:

"Everybody’s going to have to give. Everybody’s going to have to have some skin in the game," Obama said.

< Support H.R. 104 and a National Commission on Pres. War Powers and Civil Liberties | Obama: Gitmo Will Take Time to Close >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    For someone who can be so eloquent, (5.00 / 18) (#2)
    by Anne on Sat Jan 10, 2009 at 11:30:14 PM EST
    he often says things that seem remarkably dumb.

    I would have much preferred that he had taken the time to say, "There are millions of people in this country who have been making painful and difficult sacrifices for a long time, and with an economy that is getting worse, and with times getting more difficult, it's important for those of us who have not felt the pain quite as deeply to understand that it is going to be our time to give, our time to take more of the burden.  It's the right thing to do, the fair thing to do, because ultimately, when the sacrifice is shared by all, the burden is lighter for all."

    Seriously, he needs to deliver a message to those who are suffering the most, that help is on the way.  And he needs to sell the concept of helping to those who typically don't want to give it.

    Squeeze the rich (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Salo on Sat Jan 10, 2009 at 11:59:24 PM EST
    Tip their pips squeak. The immortal dennis healy

    He's selling his message to (5.00 / 0) (#13)
    by ThatOneVoter on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 12:31:22 AM EST
    voters who can donate to his reelection campaign.

    He has never been eloquent (5.00 / 8) (#30)
    by BernieO on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 08:42:44 AM EST
    without a script. And he speaks in vague generalities. Contrast his style to the Clintons or Gore who can outline the big picture but then give specifics about how to get there. Of course they all were derided as "wonks" by pundits who hate having to listen to substance.

    But (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Pepe on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 10:32:12 AM EST
    he has spoken loud and clear.

    He is offering people a $10 a week stimulus plan!!!

    That is why he is now saying "Everybody's going to have to give..." Because he ain't giving you much at all.

    Anne what you have failed to miss these last couple of years is that he is only an eloquent speaker when his is lying. When he is telling the truth he speaks from the heart much like Bush - as painful as that is.

    $10 a week for single people and $20 a couple! What else do you expect him to say other than  "Everybody's going to have to give". Of course everyone has to give because they are not getting, that's for sure.


    Well (none / 0) (#44)
    by jbindc on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 11:04:55 AM EST
    Anne didn't miss it.  She has been a long-time skeptic, dare I say, critic of the Kool-Aid crowd and their leader.

    I don't even know what (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by befuddledvoter on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 10:51:21 AM EST
    "skin in the game" means?  Is it a sports term?  So much for communication!

    That's what Bill Clinton (4.50 / 2) (#17)
    by gyrfalcon on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 12:51:14 AM EST
    would say because that's the way he thinks about these things.  Obama not so much.

    "Skin in the game"? (5.00 / 4) (#4)
    by Cream City on Sat Jan 10, 2009 at 11:40:30 PM EST
    Ugh.  Sports analogies are so wearying.  

    What happened to what seemed to be the elegance of his speechifying?  Is that only when scripted?

    Isn't it used on the streets? (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by nycstray on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 12:30:39 AM EST
    I think of it as a sport/street term.

    They've already got enough of my skin, TYVM.


    This economy has already skinned me. (5.00 / 5) (#33)
    by Maria Garcia on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 08:53:02 AM EST
    Pension decimated. Value of home down. Credit card limits dropped. Epidermis and dermis practically all gone. Down to subcutaneous tissue here and baby its cold outside.

    Yup-what about those already skinned? Lb of flesh? (none / 0) (#51)
    by jawbone on Tue Jan 13, 2009 at 12:03:20 PM EST
    Well, ER room waits can get lots longer, with more loss of life. We can cull the surplus population....

    Oh, my. I do so hope the hope held for Obama will result in substantial, good change....


    I had no idea that was a sports reference (5.00 / 3) (#20)
    by BrassTacks on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 01:37:44 AM EST
    I couldn't figure out what it meant.  

    Couldn't he have at least waited until he's inauguration to tell us that he really couldn't do what he said during the campaign?  Couldn't we have a few more days to dream that he's going to make things better?  


    Talking to the common man. (none / 0) (#8)
    by oculus on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 12:17:21 AM EST
    Exactly. (5.00 / 3) (#15)
    by Cream City on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 12:33:21 AM EST
    Not that I prefer, say, feminine hygiene analogies.

    But the commoners swooned for his elegance.  Instead, this sounds like something that, if Palin said it -- since she was a basketball star -- she would be mocked.  Youbetcha. . . .


    I doubt if there is anything she could say (5.00 / 6) (#16)
    by oculus on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 12:43:43 AM EST
    at this point that wouldn't result in mocking.

    Hillary Clinton has been replaced (5.00 / 4) (#23)
    by Fabian on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 05:08:35 AM EST
    There's a new punching bag in town.

    Compare the easy treatment (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by BernieO on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 08:49:12 AM EST
    Obama got from Stephanopoulus to Couric's tough interview with Palin. That is where the unfairness came in - not that people were tough on her, but that they never held Obama's feet to the fire in the same way. (Bill Clinton was questioned more sharply, too.) I have never seen anyone get tough with Obama and make him spell things out.

    Meanwhile on Fox little Georgie has brought along the master enabler Poppy to help rehabilitate his image. Pathetic. As I parent I love and support my kids, but I would never assume that just because they are mine they are above blame - or more qualified than others. This goes for Teddy and Caroline, too.


    Couric? (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by WS on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 09:42:21 AM EST
    Her interview was mild.  It was Palin who screwed up unless you count "What do you read?" as a tough hardball question.  

    Not a "sports analogy" (none / 0) (#45)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 11:12:32 AM EST
    A term coined by renowned investor Warren Buffett referring to a situation in which high-ranking insiders use their own money to buy stock in the company they are running.

    Investopedia Says:
    The idea behind creating this situation is to ensure that corporations are managed by like-minded individuals who share a stake in the company. Executives can talk all they want, but the best vote of confidence is putting one's own money on the line just like outside investors!



    Bet Warren got it from golf! (none / 0) (#47)
    by talesoftwokitties on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 02:04:38 PM EST

    When you play skins, you put your in your own money.


    Sometimes (5.00 / 8) (#5)
    by Salo on Sat Jan 10, 2009 at 11:57:53 PM EST
    He sounds like a tool.  do we all have to give the shirts off our backs too?

    Chipping in your pensions and (5.00 / 6) (#10)
    by ThatOneVoter on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 12:21:48 AM EST
    SS money should be sufficient.

    Did you see that (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by BernieO on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 08:55:21 AM EST
    Bush told Bill Kristol that one thing he does not get credit for is trying to privatize SS? How does that please anyone? The left hates the idea and the right sees him as a big failure for failing to accomplish this goal.
    He told someone else that he was never so anxious during his time in office as when he threw out the first ball at the World Series. More than when our country was under attack by terrorists, more than when he started a war that killed all those people. I truly believe he has narcissistic character disorder.

    Please, PEBO, give me some reason (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by ThatOneVoter on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 12:08:56 AM EST
    not to be disappointed before you even take office!

    "Scaling Back on Campaign Promises" (5.00 / 3) (#9)
    by CDN Ctzn on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 12:21:37 AM EST
    There's a real shocker!

    I guess that means no "UHC", (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by ThatOneVoter on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 12:22:26 AM EST
    to say nothing of UHC!

    Yup, that's Obama! (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by Fabian on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 05:12:28 AM EST
    I'm glad he's not McCain.  I'm not glad he's Obama, the same Obama I always knew he was.

    Now the real Obama begins to come out. (5.00 / 3) (#14)
    by mexboy on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 12:31:55 AM EST

    And still no discussion... (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by Dadler on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 12:55:44 AM EST
    ...of just what the hell money is (an inanimate object of no intrinsic value), what we need money to do for us AS A NATION (more efficiently promote the general welfare and prosperity), and how ALL work needs to be rewarded with far beyond a living wage (thus revaluing money in the context of human respect and shared purpose).  We need a currency whose value is not, like the dollar's, held up by the fantasy that lavish wealth could one day be yours, but by the reality that a stable and secure and sustainable society requires our consensus decision to have one.  Unfortunately, thanks to our reflexive hatred of all things even marginally perceived as possibly socialist -- almost rendered genetic in us by the Cold War -- any type of social planning beyond the military is considered virtually de-facto un-American.  

    Obama should've said "The economy can get worse, or it can get better, and it is entirely up to us which way it goes".  Because that is the most basic truth at work in ANY economic argument like this: share, be a good person...all the rest is commentary.

    Go Chargers.

    I totally agree (none / 0) (#32)
    by Steve M on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 08:49:43 AM EST
    Go Chargers!

    Jiminy Chrissmas (5.00 / 5) (#21)
    by shoephone on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 01:42:10 AM EST
    If I put any more "skin in the game" I'm going to be taken off the field on a stretcher.

    Gee, Barack, and I was really starting to warm up to you, and ev'rything.

    Unreal (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by mmc9431 on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 05:19:34 AM EST
    After seeing my government dump a trillion dollar blank check to the banking industry, (To say nothing of the trillion wasted in Iraq) I don't have a lot of patience when I'm told that the cookie jar is empty for me. Now I'm going to be told that they want to get more blood out of the rock that's my life!

    WSWS on Obama as representative of big business (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Andreas on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 06:32:21 AM EST
    Pure Chicago school. And it'll work (none / 0) (#49)
    by allimom99 on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 04:54:26 PM EST
    just as well here as it did in Latin America and Poland. Hang onto your hats, folks, we're in for a whole pile of cr*p. Hope and change? Maybe hope to HAVE some change.

    Hope to FIND some change--on the street! (none / 0) (#52)
    by jawbone on Tue Jan 13, 2009 at 12:13:36 PM EST
    Over a few days, enough change might get you a meal. BTW, cat food has gone up sharply in price. So, restaurant dumpster diving?

    Defense Budget (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by mmc9431 on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 08:23:29 AM EST
    I'll begin to listen to the "cuts" I'm expected to make right after Washington  starts talking about cutting the military budget of this country.

    Pigs will fly before I ever hear that!

    He needs to lead by example (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by Saul on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 08:40:06 AM EST
    Everyone has to make some sacrifice. Let him lead the way.

    I saw on TV that he got a new Presidential Car, a Cadillac that is bullet proof and all that stuff.  Taxpayers money I am sure.  

    So what was wrong with the previous Bush car. Why did he need a new one.   Does Bush get to take that with him, I don't think so.

    During these up coming Inauguration there are going to be a lot of parties.  Even if they are not being paid by taxpayers money why not show to the American people that he feels their pain and we will just have a little celebration here at the W House but not over do it.  Maybe that non taxpayer money can be better spent to help people rather than his own inauguration

    Everyone's going to have some skin in the Game? (5.00 / 5) (#36)
    by tokin librul on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 09:19:39 AM EST
    Everybody's gonna hafta 'sacrifice?'

    does that mean immediate cancellation of the Bush tax-cuts for the big money 'base'?

    Well, no...

    does it mean an end to bloated 'defense' budgets?

    well, no...

    Will that mean cuts in entitlements, social programs, etc??

    What, you been reading my mail, fella?

    Let's start with the "lucky duckies" (5.00 / 2) (#41)
    by ThatOneVoter on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 10:38:44 AM EST
    who earn so little that they are not paying income tax. Time for them to pony up!

    The Campaign Promises Were Always a Farce (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by blogname on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 11:45:00 AM EST
    Come on. This was predicted a long time ago. Even while he bought every television station to reiterate his campaign promises on the eve of the election, people who were not in effusive worship mode insisted that he could not deliver: http://dissentingjustice.blogspot.com/2008/10/which-candidate-will-keep-his-campaign.html

    Translation (none / 0) (#1)
    by SOS on Sat Jan 10, 2009 at 11:18:16 PM EST
    We're all going back to work, or bop till you drop".

    i think it's (5.00 / 3) (#3)
    by boredmpa on Sat Jan 10, 2009 at 11:32:26 PM EST
    "we've already given away your future earnings to the banks so that they can consolidate and now we are going to give away more money, lower Social Security benefits (and/or increase the retirement age), and spend a pittance on public works/infrastructure while giving away the barn to republicans so they'll vote for the infrastructure investment. also, we're not going to pursue universal health insurance because it would cost to much"*

    * even though universal health care would save massive amounts of money.

    anyway...the massive transfer of wealth to the bailout with little conditions on usage was one of the saddest moments in modern political history and signals a continuation of the destruction of the middle class.  it would take a lot to recover $$ from that idiocy.


    To reuse a phrase... (none / 0) (#19)
    by jarober on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 01:11:07 AM EST
    I think I'll start using one of the left's favorite phrases from the last few years to describe how I feel about the "spend money we don't have" stimulus plan that Obama is pushing - which follows on the heels of Bush and Pelosi's "spend money we don't have" bailout plan:

    "Not in my name"

    I seem to recall (none / 0) (#22)
    by Steve M on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 02:47:18 AM EST
    that one of the most standard criticisms of Bush was that he never called on us to sacrifice.

    More like (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Fabian on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 05:16:07 AM EST
    Bush was unwilling to make his wars even more unpopular by reminding us of how much others were already sacrificing.

    The economy was walking a tightrope for a long time and the one thing Bush didn't want was for consumers to stop spending.

    I'm sure his message of Sacrifice will go over well with the unemployed and newly unemployed.


    He never called on us to sacrifice... (5.00 / 3) (#35)
    by Maria Garcia on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 08:55:47 AM EST
    ...but we did anyway. Many of us did and now after the fact a little acknowledgment would be nice.

    Taking from the rich (none / 0) (#38)
    by sistersue on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 10:24:00 AM EST
    I think he is going to sacrifice the rich more and you know what the rich are who do not like Obama. The rich want to get richer!

    I have heard comments from wealthy people say that I worked hard for my money now he wants to take it!!

    Well, it is about time that he takes from people that will not miss it rather than the poor working class trying to make ends meet

    And... (none / 0) (#43)
    by jbindc on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 11:01:59 AM EST
    For which he resigned his seat so he didn't have to vote.

    Funny you should mention that ... (none / 0) (#48)
    by FreakyBeaky on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 02:41:23 PM EST
    I thought part of Obama's appeal was always that he was going to ask everyone to pitch in and wouldn't let us all stay in our comfort zones.  Not so appealing after all?  


    To renew America, we must be bold. (none / 0) (#50)
    by RonK Seattle on Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 09:09:03 PM EST
    ... To renew America, we must be bold.

      We must do what no generation has had to do before. We must invest more in our own people, in their jobs, in their future, and at the same time cut our massive debt. And we must do so in a world in which we must compete for every opportunity.

      It will not be easy; it will require sacrifice. But it can be done, and done fairly, not choosing sacrifice for its own sake, but for our own sake. We must provide for our nation the way a family provides for its children. ...