Obama Improving At "11 Dimensional Chess"

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Obama Administration
Posted on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 07:52:44 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Unlike some of his sycophants, President Obama seems open to learning from his mistakes. In response to yet another question about "bipartisanship" in last night's press conference, this one from Mara Liasson, President Obama said in part:

Now, just in terms of the historic record here, the Republicans were brought in early and were consulted. And you'll remember that when we initially introduced our framework, they were pleasantly surprised and complimentary about the tax cuts that were presented in that framework. Those tax cuts are still in there. I mean, I suppose what I could have done is started off with no tax cuts, knowing that I was going to want some, and then let them take credit for all of them. And maybe that's the lesson I learned.

(Emphasis supplied.) Indeed Mr. President. It is good to see President Obama does not believe the press clippings from his sycophants and is willing to learn. Now that is change I can believe in from the previous 8 years. Also, Faiz Shakir at Think Progress had it last night.

Speaking for me only

< "11 Dimensional Chess" Goes Viral | Why Was The AMT Fix Thrown Into The Stimulus Package? >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Obama Improving At "11 Dimensional Chess" | 26 comments (26 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

That was a snarky ... (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by Robot Porter on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 08:06:35 AM EST

"joke" on the Obama's part.

I liked a lot of things Obama said in the press conference. And he very well may be able to learn from his mistakes. (Holding the press conference itself was evidence of that.) But the response you quote didn't send that message to me.

that's the way I took it too (5.00 / 2) (#5)
by ruffian on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 08:12:58 AM EST

He was saying laughingly that he could have done it that way, but implying that it would have been ridiculous and juvenile. That is the kind of game playing he does not like and is trying to end.

Maybe he will do it that way next time, but he'll have to be dragged kicking and screaming by Rahm or someone.


BTW, I sympathise with him (5.00 / 1) (#7)
by ruffian on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 08:20:11 AM EST

I hate that kind of game playing too. I think it would be great if we could always just say want we want straightforwardly and let the other person accept or reject it, and move on.

That's why I'm an engineer and not a politician.


But it's NOT... (5.00 / 2) (#21)
by sj on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 10:28:49 AM EST

...ridiculous and juvenile to do it that way. I think he implied that, too. But it's really part of negotiating.

In my mind it's way more juvenile to worry more about who gets credit than it is to worry about the result.

But I think taking credit is pretty important to him. I hope I'm wrong.


: It's part of politics (5.00 / 1) (#22)
by ruffian on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 10:43:07 AM EST

I get the impression he only wants to be in politics if he can change it so that, as he said last night, rationality and civility rule the day. That would be great, but I'm not holding my breath. Meanwhile, it is all about negotiation.

I dunno... (none / 0) (#25)
by Thanin on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 02:52:05 PM EST

this sounds pretty WORM-like. I agree with BTD: he made a mistake and was saying what he learned from it, as he said.


Agreed. Reminded me (none / 0) (#8)
by jes on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 08:21:04 AM EST

of the question in an earlier debate when he was asked about his worst fault and then went on later to mock Hillary and Edwards for answering the question in the way we have all been taught to - turn it into a positive.


Didn't Obama say again that (5.00 / 1) (#2)
by ThatOneVoter on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 08:08:20 AM EST

Republicans have good ideas on entitlements?
Really?
For an n-dimensional chess player, that sounds
kind of "p-braned"
to me.

I liked when Obama ... (5.00 / 4) (#9)
by Robot Porter on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 08:22:03 AM EST

pushed back against certain press myths. For example his response to Chuck Todd's question. Todd as part of his question said:

But isn't consumer spending, or over-spending, how we got into this mess?

Obama responding to that part said:

Well, first of all, I don't think it's accurate to say that consumer spending got us into this mess. What got us into this mess initially were banks taking exorbitant, wild risks with other people's monies, based on shaky assets.

Where the hell did Todd get (none / 0) (#11)
by ThatOneVoter on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 08:24:31 AM EST

that misinformation? I haven't even heard that one before.


: Where do you think (5.00 / 0) (#12)
by Molly Bloom on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 08:29:16 AM EST

Where do they usually get that kind of misinformation...

: It's the argument ... (5.00 / 1) (#13)
by Robot Porter on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 08:31:29 AM EST

that the problem with this economy was "people buying HDTVs on their credit cards."
The whole "it's not just Wall Street and Banks, the whole culture is to blame" argument.
You heard that a lot in the press, especially early in the crisis.
Stupid argument. And I'm glad Obama punched holes in it.

: Todd was great as the numbers' guy during (5.00 / 0) (#14)
by byteb on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 08:46:09 AM EST

the primary. He's not so great as a White House Correspondent.

J. P. Green (5.00 / 1) (#15)
by andgarden on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 08:46:17 AM EST

says:

The 61-36 procedural vote was close to perfect, indicating that the compromise bill is about as progressive as it could have been and still pass. This is not to say that the left critics are wrong about the stimulus being too small and the tax cuts too large to do much good -- a separate question. They may be right. But a razor-close margin is exactly what you want to see to get the most progressive possible bill passed.

But does he really know that this is the best bill possible? It seems almost impossible to me that Susan Collins and Arlen Specter had specific numbers in mind, past which they would not support the bill. Rather, it seems much more likely to me that what we ended up with is just enough less than what we started with that they can claim to have had some moderating impact. In other words, they care far more about appearance than substance. This is why starting with such a low number was a mistake.

He knows nothing (5.00 / 1) (#16)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 08:48:39 AM EST

What an insipid comment from him.


: It's almost one ... (5.00 / 1) (#17)
by Robot Porter on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 08:54:40 AM EST

of those "failing is an indication of success" type arguments.

More about appearance than substance (5.00 / 1) (#18)
by ruffian on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 09:23:32 AM EST

Same as in the House, the Republicans don't really want this bill to get defeated, they just want to be able to be on record against it, weaken it, and still have it go forward. Senate Dems did not press the envelope at all. Pressing the envelope would be to put out a truly progressive spending bill and let them really filibuster it. If they stood firm for more than a few days and started gaining public support, then compromise a little. My guess is that they would lose public support fast and fold like a tent.

But that would not be the bipartisan way, and it was ruled out before we even started. stupid stupid stupid.


From the Shakir piece/Obama (5.00 / 2) (#20)
by rghojai on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 09:54:00 AM EST

(Obama) added, "People have to break out of some of the ideological rigidity and gridlock that we've been carrying around for too long."

If it gets done, great, and I will be the first to praise Obama's role in getting it done, but call me skeptical.

Some memory of Barney Frank saying during the primary that he thought Obama overestimated his ability to win over opposing forces and underestimated the opposing forces' entrenched intransigence.

it's more than who gets credit or letting the (5.00 / 1) (#23)
by nycvoter on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 11:34:00 AM EST

republicans think they won something. When you are negotiating you should hold something back. Who doesn't go to the table asking for more and offering less than they want?

Obama is still a one-dimensional con-man (1.00 / 1) (#3)
by Jacob Freeze on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 08:08:24 AM EST

The American public isn't exactly cosmic about economics, but when they see and hear an impossible-not-to-respect Nobel Prize winner like Paul Krugman and everybody else except for Republican trolls like George Will saying the "stimulus" sucks, then even the usually gullible public gets a clue, and even a totally unprincipled con-man like Obama has to add a little reality to his con.

$9.7 trillion is flowing out of the Federal Reserve and the Treasury into international banks with no strings attached, and one moment of realistic blather from Obama isn't much compensation for this gigantic con.

: You know (none / 0) (#26)
by Socraticsilence on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 03:43:56 PM EST

I like Krugman to but try and not use the Nobel as some sort of Cudgel- I mean Friedman won a Nobel as well and that doesn't mean his theories are brilliant. Oh and quit the "con man" crap.

As I like to say (none / 0) (#4)
by DWCG on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 08:12:31 AM EST

Obama is learning the meaning of Grover Norquist statement that "bipartisanship is another name for date rape."

Unfortunately it's occurring in the context of the most important piece of legislation definitely of his first year, and possibly his first term.

: Um, WE may be learning it, (none / 0) (#6)
by ThatOneVoter on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 08:16:17 AM EST

from Obama.

Obama's statement on tax cuts (none / 0) (#10)
by oculus on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 08:22:11 AM EST

confused me. During the GE didn't he say he would let the Bush tax cuts expire? And then didn't he later say perhaps he wouldn't be able to let them all expire due to the state of the economy?

: The bush tax (none / 0) (#24)
by JThomas on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 02:32:23 PM EST

cuts are scheduled to expire in 2010 and Obama has continued to say he would let them go away.
What he did say was that he could not raise taxes on the wealthy immediately in 09 due to the state of the economy.
But they will be sunset on schedule in 2010.

Think Progress takes it straight too (none / 0) (#19)
by ruffian on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 09:41:35 AM EST

as lessons learned - Here. So do their commenters:

BINGO! Gotta love this guy. Hopefully he takes this lesson learned and applies it to the Iranians.

Good god. After watching the tape at their link, I continue to think my first impression was right. He was being sarcastic about that kind of approach.