President Obama will sit for interviews Monday with six TV networks as he makes his case to the nation for military intervention in Syria.
Obama will tape interviews Monday afternoon with anchors from ABC, CBS and NBC, as well as with PBS, CNN and Fox News, the White House said.
The interviews will be conducted by ABC's Diane Sawyer, CBS's Scott Pelley, CNN's Wolf Blitzer, Fox's Chris Wallace, NBC's Brian Williams and PBS's Gwen Ifill.
The interviews will air that night, ahead of Obama's Tuesday speech on Syria.
I have no earthly idea what his "strategy" is; it will be interesting to compare the different episodes of "patty-cake with the press". It's too bad that Wolfie is pitching for CNN rather than the hard-hitting Jake Tapper, and I'd much rather see Bret Baier than Wallace.
Althouse has a few thoughts. What do you think? Is Obama about to jump the shark?
All the interviews will contain the same key catch-phrases that his "team" (Cutter, Axelrod, Jarred, etc.) have decided would do best with their polling. I'm watching not one minute of it.
ReplyDeleteThe thin-skinned teleprompter reader is a disgrace and has no clue what it means to lead.
I won't be watching either.
DeleteI think it's on.
ReplyDeleteCongress needs cover; they can't just vote for a strike apropos of next to nothing (which is what Obama's come up with to date.)
So flood the zone, full court press, and Congress can say "well the President has made his case blah blah" and the vote is done.
Pretty much regardless of what he actually says.
The inside the beltway, realpolitik calculus says the US pretty much has to drop bombs at this point. How did we get to this point? Because Obama's an idiot and by now everyone knows so.
Obviously nobody wants to do this thing, really.
But if the vote fails, then the rest of the world will take the signal that there well and truly is no functional government in the US with respect to foreign policy. Hilarity will ensue. And by hilarity I mean bad things.
I'm still against a strike. But I'm cognizant of what it will cost us. Perhaps the best thing at this point is for friend and foe alike to realize the truth: actually, they are correct, there is nobody in charge in the US and no consensus on what constitutes our legitimate national interest.
If we go ahead with the cruise missile kabuki pro forma, we can't really contain the outcome. The enemy gets a vote.
I know that not following our "leader" will weaken our position in the world, but we can't back a president whose perception of reality is so obviously skewed. Obama presents to the world as clumsy and uncomfortable with foreign relations, and woefully uneducated on military matters.
DeleteHe's in over his head, and has been since day one. It's scary as hell.
The world already knows we have no leader. I think it may actually be better to show the world the the United States has finally realized that fact and not approve the attack.
DeleteThis situation scares the bejeebus outta me. Obama's only raison d'etre to bomb Syria is his own hubris. This is not a reason to go to war. Hey, Mr. President, there is no "right" side in this conflict. Whoever you champion in this conflict means you are on the WRONG side.
ReplyDeleteCalling Ed Asner, Susan Sarandon, Tim Robbins, Jessica Lange, Sean Penn, George Clooney, Barbra Streisand et al.
Kumbaya and out.
Fay, look here :-)
DeleteWell, we're all on the same page as Charlie Rangel.
ReplyDelete:|
Obama's a political genius - he really is bringing the country together!
Oh, and Tom Friedman is (sorta, kinda) making some sense.
DeleteSpooky.