Obamateurism of the Day
posted at 8:05 am on January 18, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
This is a combination Obamateurism, as there are a couple of moments from yesterday’s campaign appearance that just doesn’t make sense. On one hand, Obama says he doesn’t know anything about Scott Brown and his record:
Obama never once uttered Brown’s name, and admitted that he wasn’t too familiar with him.
“I’ve heard about some of the ads that Martha’s opponent’s running,” Obama said. “He’s driving his truck around the Commonwealth. He said he gets you. That he’ll fight for you. That he’ll be an independent voice. I don’t know him. I don’t know his record. I don’t know whether he’s been fighting for you up until now. But here’s what I do know. I want a senator who’s independent too … and here’s what I know: Martha will do so. She’s got a track record of doing so. I know there are things in which she and I disagree. She doesn’t just call herself independent. She has the character to be independent. I hear her opponent is calling himself independent. But you have to look under the hood.”
He doesn’t know Brown’s record, but he has no problem characterizing it for the audience:
Obama recited Coakley’s common refrain that, “As a legislator he (Brown) voted with Republicans 96 percent of the time.”
“It’s hard to suggest he’s going to be significantly independent from the Republican agenda,” Obama said.
D’oh!
But on the other hand, he knows enough to say that Brown will vote against taxes:
You’d better check under the hood, because from everything I’ve seen, Martha’s opponent would have voted against those taxes!
D’oh!
She would have voted against those tax cuts!
D’oh!! You can almost hear Martha Coakley saying, “You can shut up now, Mr. President.” And listen to the crowd go silent as he muffed the easy play. Obama would have been better off sticking to his first argument, which is that he didn’t know what he was talking about, rather than continuing to open his mouth and make it obvious.
Got an Obamateurism of the Day? If you see a foul-up by Barack Obama, e-mail it to me at obamaisms@edmorrissey.com with the quote and the link to the Obamateurism. I’ll post the best Obamateurisms on a daily basis, depending on how many I receive. Include a link to your blog, and I’ll give some link love as well. And unlike Slate, I promise to end the feature when Barack Obama leaves office.
Illustrations by Chris Muir of Day by Day. Be sure to read the adventures of Sam, Zed, Damon, and Jan every day!
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
From what I understand, “couple” is not always a collective unifier. It depends on whether the sentence is referring to the “couple” — as a single entity — as the object, or whether “couple” is a qualifier (or quantifier, I guess) for the objects.
For the plural, “There are a couple of items I’d like to discuss,” is synonymous to “There are two items I’d like to discuss.” For a singular case, though, “There is a couple sitting in that booth,” is not the same statement as “There are two people sitting in that booth;” by identifying them as a “couple” certain implicit connotations are made, and the two — from a grammar standpoint — become one. Those connotations are made by “There is a couple (of …) …” but are not made by something like “There are a couple of … ” so the statements are different, but neither one is intrinsically wrong.
It’s kind of like “a bunch” (“A bunch of bananas is all we will need to feed the monkey.” vs. “A bunch of people have passed through here today.”), “a (whole) lot,” (“There is a lot of items on the truck that needs to be unloaded” vs. “There are a lot of us that are going to the game tomorrow.”) etc.
That being said, neither the original “are/doesn’t” nor the offered revision of “is/don’t” seem to work as far as I can tell, but in the grand scheme of things it seems pretty minor, and I’m not really in any position to throw stones at any one’s typos and grammar slips. :)
BlueCollarAstronaut on January 18, 2010 at 9:14 AM
Apparently the goons plan on doubling down. Fox ‘n’ Friends relayed the news that on the plane coming back from the Boston Massacre, Robert Gibbs assured us that their War Against Profits won’t stop with imposing extra special taxes on banks, that they are prepared to penalize any corporation which makes a profit.
The only question is: Is this part of the Cloward Piven strategy, or is this just the action of Useful Idiots who don’t realize that this would make today’s unemployment rate look like the good old days, and totally kill the stock market.
Buy Danish on January 18, 2010 at 9:14 AM
We now witness the loss of his oratorical aura: “… evil Republican! …” (Not working! shift gears) “… evil tax cuts! …” (Still not working: shift gears!) “… hope and change! …” (Aw c’mon, STILL not working? Grind gears!) “… er, er, er …” (Dammit: SHIFT gears, not GRIND!) “… Boooooosh! …” (I’m stunned! It can’t be me: what’s wrong with these O-bots? Shift gears!) …
ya2daup on January 18, 2010 at 8:39 AM
ya2aup: Grinding the political gears!
5* Stars,and two thumbs up!!:)
canopfor on January 18, 2010 at 9:16 AM
Wowser!
Obama: “I don’t know Scott Brown or his record…so I’ll just make some shit up and attack THAT!”
Impressive, your Highness.
Justrand on January 18, 2010 at 9:16 AM
We tried to open the hood before the election. It remains locked. No birth certificate, no college records, no record of how he paid for college, no health records…need I go on?
R D on January 18, 2010 at 9:16 AM
PLEASE SEND SCOTT $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
OmahaConservative on January 18, 2010 at 9:17 AM
Slightly OT, make sure you go over to the Green Room and read The Other McCain’s piece on his day in Massachusetts yesterday and watch his two-minute video on Viet Vet Randy May:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1DbvLXLAjM
PatMac on January 18, 2010 at 9:19 AM
I didn’t know he was taking the kids with him.
MarkTheGreat on January 18, 2010 at 9:20 AM
People who say they don’t support his policies but do support him are afraid of being thought of as racist. Obama will be a one term president. It will take ten years to undo the damage.
Basilsbest on January 18, 2010 at 9:20 AM
Obama will take credit for it if it happens.
I’m seriously wondering why Larry Summers and Christina Romer don’t resign in disgust.
Buy Danish on January 18, 2010 at 9:20 AM
Gezz, everyone knows that pickups are gas hogs like SUVs which are prone to kill and maim people on their own volition, making them evil, therefore pickup drivers are evil and owners should immediately trade in their pickups for eco-friendly, green, union-made GM electric cars to become good people again. Else be forever evil like Brown who arrogantly drives, nay flaunts, his evilness by driving a pickup around.
:)
Friendly21 on January 18, 2010 at 9:20 AM
Voting against taxes should be what all voters should be doing, no matter what party.
But, Obama says the enemy of his candidate will vote against taxes? And this is a bad thing?
God grant me the serenity to never agree with any Democrat, Liberal, or Progressive.
Cybergeezer on January 18, 2010 at 9:21 AM
Question 1.
Obama claims the following about a candidate in a special election of major importance to the state of Massachusetts and the nation as a whole:
“I don’t know him. I don’t know his record. I don’t know whether he’s been fighting for you up until now.”
The man is:
A. An idiot
B. A liar
C. A demagoguing, narcissistic, anti-American Marixist who is bent on turning the country into a third world socialist craphole, and who shouldn’t have been elected to any public office, much less to the Presidency of the United States.
D. All of the above.
justltl on January 18, 2010 at 9:22 AM
This is an Ivy League-educated college professor talking.
Akzed on January 18, 2010 at 9:23 AM
This is a good catch of a good Obamatuerism, but if memory serves, Obama’s position is even more convoluted. In his robocalls, etc. hasn’t he been telling us what a good little ally Coakley is going to be?
So he’s telling us that he doesn’t know Brown’s record (except that he does), but that Brown claims to be independent (which Obama — by contradicting the first statement — claims is false), but that’s OK, because Obama’s telling us we can rely on Coakley to be independent, too (except that he’s already told us he’s relying on that fact that she’s not), because she would vote the same way Brown would, which somehow makes her the better of the two.
Great orator, indeed!
BlueCollarAstronaut on January 18, 2010 at 9:23 AM
What kind or support did President Obama provide Ms. Coakly?
Six times the “I’ of the President’s ego shows. President Obama implies Ms. Coakly will be a schill for his use because the President claims she has the character to be independent, but is not sure if she has the moxie to be independent. “here’s what I know: Martha will do so …” Will do so? Meaning, do as I say not as you want to do.”
The bottom line, who is really in this this contest. Ms. Coakly, President Obama, or U.S.?
MSGTAS on January 18, 2010 at 9:24 AM
And Obama talking about the man because he drives an SUV?
OBAMA’S MOTORCADE SUCKS UP AS MUCH FUEL, AND PUMPS OUT AS MUCH CO2, AS A MILITARY CONVOY EVERY WHERE HE GOES.
Cybergeezer on January 18, 2010 at 9:25 AM
I suspect he got inflated grades at Hahvahd.
SouthernGent on January 18, 2010 at 9:26 AM
Hey did you see the attack in Kabul yesterday by the Tally-ban that, according to “Marcia” Coakley, are not there? Dang. Imagine how bad the attack would have been had the Tally-ban actually been in Afghanistan.
BigAlSouth on January 18, 2010 at 9:27 AM
Very good! We know what’s in his trunk:
Dog eared copies of the Communist Manifesto and Saul Alinsky’s books, DVD’s of the sermons of Jeremiah Wright, blank absentee voter forms, snake oil …
Buy Danish on January 18, 2010 at 9:27 AM
O-blabbo acted stupidly.
AubieJon on January 18, 2010 at 9:27 AM
I did not recognize that dialect….
right2bright on January 18, 2010 at 9:31 AM
I loved the picture of the family walking out on him…that tells a lot right there.
That never happened one year ago….
right2bright on January 18, 2010 at 9:33 AM
Look, Massachusetts may be a Liberal wonderland, but it’s still New England. And New Englanders don’t mind seeing their president dressed formally. That casual look might work in California or Arizona, or even Texas, but I doubt it won many converts in Boston.
Notice that he goes cas in direct proportion to how pissed off he is? Quite a tell.
EMD on January 18, 2010 at 9:33 AM
Noticed a lot of those inconsistencies and non sequitors in his pep talk. Said he didn’t know Brown, then said he’s offering “more of the same” as Bush the last 10 years, which “didn’t work”. And it’s humorous people think Obama is above demagoguery when no one speaks more about others, his opponents/detrators that is, being divisive and fear-mongering, which he did again this time. Impuning the motives of others. He does it, and it’s ugly. I thought his pep talk was a bomb. But then I’ve never been a fan of his.
Paul-Cincy on January 18, 2010 at 9:33 AM
Yep, another Obamateurism within an Obamateurism. Indeed, as this special election unfolds and the full reality of consequences of the people’s revolt becomes crystal clear, the abject stupidity of Obama’s nonsensical speech for Coakley may be the Obamateurism of the Year… and it’s only January.
Although his State of the Union should be a rich source, and I can imagine him wearing a parrot on his shoulder.
Buy Danish on January 18, 2010 at 9:36 AM
f.w.i.w., The Boston Herald’s editor, Shelly Cohen, is making the point I’ve been making all along:
This is all about health care. We have 97% of our residents insured here. We have nothing to gain from ObamaCare.
Buy Danish on January 18, 2010 at 9:41 AM
Michelle Malkin and Laura Ingraham are on a roll today on the L.I. show.
OmahaConservative on January 18, 2010 at 9:41 AM
Question 2.
Obama shoud be:
A. Ridiculed relentlessly for his inanity.
B. Voted out of office at the earliest opportunity.
C. The guy on the corner with a squeegee instead of President of the United States.
D. Jailed.
E. All of the above.
justltl on January 18, 2010 at 9:42 AM
We’ll never know… those records (along with everything else) are sealed up, tight as a drum.
jana on January 18, 2010 at 9:43 AM
Aaargh! Time to walk the plank, Bambi!
jana on January 18, 2010 at 9:44 AM
PUT.ON.A.TIE.OR.TAKE.OFF.THE.JACKET.
He must realize he is imitating a Muslim politician. I can understand if he’s a rancher from Montana, but he’s a lawyer from Chicago.
Notice in the first clip he is still just reading words off his teleprompters. His brief actual glances at the audience are chin-up look-down-his-nose.
MarkT on January 18, 2010 at 9:51 AM
Once again he shows that he is just all wee-wee’d up over what is about to happen to his precious Supermajority in the Senate.
pilamaye on January 18, 2010 at 9:56 AM
I think it’s great that Obama gets all fired up and goes after a State Senator. POTUS taking on a state senator.
When dealing with dicatators and our enemies, not so much fire.
reaganaut on January 18, 2010 at 9:57 AM
dictators…
reaganaut on January 18, 2010 at 9:57 AM
+1000
nail…head
cmsinaz on January 18, 2010 at 9:59 AM
Can you imagine 3 more years of this? He’s not just bad, he’s dangerous. Innocent Americans die when presidents are this incompetent.
Mojave Mark on January 18, 2010 at 10:06 AM
Listening to the second clip about opponent and taxes, I don’t know what the h#ll he is talking about. He is all over the map. Something about Brown would have voted against those taxes and then says “She would of, He would of voted against those tax cuts”. Is he talking about Coakley or Brown when he mentions “voting against those tax cuts”?
Electrongod on January 18, 2010 at 10:07 AM
Even he doesn’t know. He just reads what’s in front of him, and if he loses his place he gets so flustered that he can’t recover.
jana on January 18, 2010 at 10:12 AM
I haven’t been able to bring myself to watch the clips, because on a good day his speech mannerisms drive me nuts (and I’m not having a particularly good day so far). But for a campaign rally, it’s amazing how in both stills, absolutely *nobody* behind him looks happy to be there.
Not sure whether it’s worry on Coakley’s supporters’ side about her real chance at winning (which worry makes me happy, evil conservative that I am), or irritation at listening to Obama speak (which I completely empathize with), or both.
I’m inclined to vote both, but with heavier emphasis on the latter.
LibraryGryffon on January 18, 2010 at 10:12 AM
Dear lord…Everytime this guy opens his mouth it’s just to change feet.
ZeeMI on January 18, 2010 at 10:12 AM
I don’t know anything about what happened but in this case “we all know the Cambridge Police acted stupidly.
Herb on January 18, 2010 at 10:17 AM
Affirmative action America.
jukin on January 18, 2010 at 10:25 AM
Delicious.
ladyingray on January 18, 2010 at 10:31 AM
Exactly,
The bottom line is, he strings together some good sounding words, without any substance.
The guy made more gaffes than a commercial tuna fisherman.
see what I did there?
franksalterego on January 18, 2010 at 10:36 AM
Just another occasion in Mass, where Barry opens his mouth about something he knows nothing about.
Sure is hard on Barry without a Teleprompter.
GarandFan on January 18, 2010 at 10:40 AM
That catchy phrase is solid gold and I shall steal it without remorse.
SKYFOX on January 18, 2010 at 10:54 AM
Mildly OT:
Next year, the Prime MInister of England should give Obmama a couple of ties.
DrAllecon on January 18, 2010 at 11:01 AM
He basically said the same thing about the whole mess with troopergate, that was the first thing I thought. Then I just sat there in wonder at the stupidity of it all, if the 0ne didn’t just write the most perfect ad advocating for Scott Brown.. what the heck did he do?
4shoes on January 18, 2010 at 11:07 AM
I wish Jon Stewart or O\’Reilly would do a show on this, that would be sweeeeet.
scalleywag on January 18, 2010 at 11:25 AM
“But he is White, so it’s obvious he acted stupidly.”
He need to change his name to O “bomb” a because he is bombing out in all areas of his Presidency! He can’t even count on his star power and “charisma” to draw crowds in MASACHUSETT[e]S!!!!
ihasurnominashun on January 18, 2010 at 11:40 AM
Forgive me it this (approximate) quote has already been referenced:
“Better to be thought a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt.”
SKYFOX on January 18, 2010 at 11:45 AM
Wow!!! This is either complete, and utter stupidity on Barats part, or they are truly stumping for Brown.
It’s hard for me to fathom that Obama is that insipid, and detatched, to believe he thinks the people of Mass, or anywhere, are just keen on the idea of higher, and more taxes? Especially when the outcry against them, has been made abundantly clear.
Either he IS this stupid, and believes that people are just foaming at the mouth to pay him more of their hard earned dollars, and that he’s adored like a deity, or ….well I think that about sums it up…eh?
capejasmine on January 18, 2010 at 11:45 AM
Whata Maroon!!!
AH_C on January 18, 2010 at 12:30 PM
Really? You, who as President represents one of the two political parties in our system, really want an independent senator? You truly expect people to believe you want someone who will vote against the Democrat’s party line?
Sorry, but no. Presidents only want independent senators when they’re from the other party. You can get elected stirring poop like this, but once you’re in office you don’t look too convincing when you’re licking the spoon.
James on January 18, 2010 at 12:36 PM
This clown is Mortimer Snerd and Mr. Magoo combined. Not only is his style of delivery vexing, he can’t seem to come up with anything of any value on his own. Constant stupidities.
LarryG on January 18, 2010 at 12:45 PM
Look at how tired and wiped out Obama looks.
This what happens to you when you campaign non-stop for over two years. He looks all befuddled and disheveled, like he’s just phoning it in while running on fumes.
He’s a one termer. He won’t have the gas to run another election campaign, and if he tries he’s gonna look like a worn out bum on his last legs.
OxyCon on January 18, 2010 at 12:48 PM
SKYFOX on January 18, 2010 at 10:54 AM
You have my blessing. It’s something my grandma used to say.
ZeeMI on January 18, 2010 at 2:23 PM
Once again………. No tie.
ThePrez on January 18, 2010 at 2:53 PM
Is this the winner for 2010 OOTY?!?
RedNewEnglander on January 18, 2010 at 4:04 PM
Ha! Fox25 in Boston refers to Obama forgetting where he is as his ‘Spinal Tap’ moment.
Buy Danish on January 18, 2010 at 5:20 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2