NYT on Obama’s speech: Thank goodness he spoke out against this week’s rhetorical ugliness — especially Palin’s

posted at 4:23 pm on January 13, 2011 by Allahpundit

Before this week, I would have chalked this up to simple dishonesty. They know perfectly well who he meant last night when he talked about “pointing fingers or assigning blame” in a way that “wounds,” I’d have said, but they’re such miserable shills for their liberal readership that they feel obliged to cocoon them from the truth.

But after four days of voodoo and magical thinking? I don’t know. If the left can hallucinate a right-wing motive for Jared Loughner, why couldn’t the Times hallucinate an entirely different subtext for a speech?

Mr. Obama called on ideological campaigners to stop vilifying their opponents. The only way to move forward after such a tragedy, he said, is to cast aside “point-scoring and pettiness.” He rightly focused primarily on the lives of those who died and the heroism of those who tried to stop the shooter and save the victims. He urged prayers for the 14 wounded, including Representative Gabrielle Giffords, the target of the rampage. Their stories needed to be told, their lives celebrated and mourned.

It was important that Mr. Obama transcend the debate about whose partisanship has been excessive and whose words have sown the most division and dread. This page and many others have identified those voices and called on them to stop demonizing their political opponents. The president’s role in Tucson was to comfort and honor, and instill hope…

The president’s words were an important contrast to the ugliness that continues to swirl in some parts of the country. The accusation by Sarah Palin that “journalists and pundits” had committed a “blood libel” when they raised questions about overheated rhetoric was especially disturbing, given the grave meaning of that phrase in the history of the Jewish people.

Not only is not a single word breathed here about the left’s demagoguery, but lest you doubt who they have in mind when they refer to “voices” that demonize, revisit their editorial from the day after the shooting. That’s not the end of the dishonesty, either: As of this morning, in quoting Obama’s now famous passage about whether a lack of civility was responsible for the shootings, the editorial actually omitted the part where he emphatically said “it did not” — the narrative-killing moment. Follow the link above and you’ll see that they’ve now very quietly inserted it into the text, after Verum Serum caught the omission and started calling attention to it. If their defense is that they were working off his prepared remarks, which didn’t include the “it did not” ad lib, well, so was I, but there was enough buzz about that line afterwards that I managed to flag it in time for our post. What’s the Paper of Record’s excuse?

Like many of our readers, Ace is frustrated that The One didn’t call out the left by name last night because it allows apologists like the Times editorial board to engage in precisely this sort of absurd spin. I sympathize with that point, but realistically, he can’t call his own base jackasses. In fact, he could have been much vaguer than he was, sticking to hazy pleading about avoiding “demonization” instead of referring specifically to finger-pointing over the cause of the shootings, which, after all, has only been coming from one side. Look at it this way: If O’s performance was as bad as all that, would Glenn Beck be praising him today “for becoming the president of the United States of America last night”?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2

And Krauthammer said the debate was already over when she “injected herself” into it.

He’s so smart.

the_nile on January 13, 2011 at 4:27 PM

Krauthammer’s reputation as a genius has its roots in the same place 0bamessiah’s vaunted skill at speechmaking does…

Bizarro No. 1 on January 13, 2011 at 5:16 PM

I dunno how this is still going to work in his favor. I sat in the teacher lounge today at lunch listening to a bunch of career, mostly union, teachers all agree that while his speech was good, the whole pep rally vibe of the “memorial service” and what one teacher called the “constant campaign mode” was really turning them off. There was not a single person in the room who thought that the president had come off well, even though they are all supporters of him and Democrats and lefty politics in general.

There was a lot of disgruntlement with him. And not one blamed Sarah Palin for standing up and telling people to stop calling her a murderer.

Just my own personal observations with a group of people he can usually call on to support him. This may be the final straw for a lot of people.

Lily on January 13, 2011 at 5:16 PM

Beck praising Obama’s progressivist speech? I’m at a loss. I really don’t know what else to say.

pugwriter on January 13, 2011 at 5:16 PM

Beck praising Obama’s progressivist speech? I’m at a loss. I really don’t know what else to say.

pugwriter on January 13, 2011 at 5:16 PM

He may have praised the speech, but he’s tearing Obama a new one on his show right now.

Knucklehead on January 13, 2011 at 5:21 PM

It would be pretty cool if, when she’s well enough, Giffords called Palin from the hospital to say how sorry and mortified she is that fellow Democrats would even think to libel Palin over this, much less actually do it.

Of course, BLM would run the headline: Giffords Forgives Palin Over Role In Shooting.

Christien on January 13, 2011 at 5:21 PM

The jury saw the freak show last night. Bo did not tell em to tone it down. Somebody wrote him a b paper to read,not his usual pacing if you will note. He brought a cast of odious people with him and America got a close up look/listen to his base. The fake Indian/NA set the tone right off. The Jury saw all this and will make a decision. Many told me they either left the room or turned the BS off.Bo did what they wanted done and we get to vote. Bad vibes,bad show.Time to drop this and work the phones tomorrow to your congress critters starting at 0830 EST.
Beck,ED ET Al have lit off a discussion the might let the left think they pulled a good one so that the left continues to be the crass,callow,classless dips that they are the Conservatives in the Nation will deal in facts and vote the idiots of both parties out,I hope.
Together We Thrive, the new yes we can hopey thingy slogan out for a test drive.

Col.John Wm. Reed on January 13, 2011 at 5:24 PM

Please, let’s be civil, here. If conservatives actually tone it down, as our dear President has asked, and the left does not, what will that tell you?

It’s nearly two years ’til next election.

Skandia Recluse on January 13, 2011 at 4:27 PM

I’m seriously asking you, are you joking? I hope so. If not, “tone it down”? Tone what down? I’ll ask you to explain how you can be civil with people who shamelessly slander you. By accepting their unfounded attacks in silence? With gentle rebukes?

This is not the time for passivity on the Right.

Bizarro No. 1 on January 13, 2011 at 5:30 PM

I sympathize with that point, but realistically, he can’t call his own base jackasses.

If he had an honest bone in his body, he could. And if he was anything like a real leader and statesman truly concerned about “The Tone,” he’d be compelled to.

Mike H on January 13, 2011 at 5:33 PM

Teachers know who the nuts are.
Teachers in the classroom are sick of PC.We have all had Jerrod in class at one time or another and were told he needed more self esteem or some other BS. You literally have to write “The Letter” that says he is not to be in your room anymore because he is a “clear and present danger to the students,you,and himself. Then wait for his advocate to show up for the ard and threaten to sue. I personally told more than one such advocate that I owned nothing in my name,could drag out depositions,discovery without a lawyer,and was willing to see the kids family bankrupt in legal billing time.Then I added if we did go to court and I lost to bring money,lots of money because I would run up the nickle again on appeal.Never lost a dismissal,OC placement but some other poor teacher was stuck with kid. Once one kid spent the whole second semester in a chair with our text book outside the principals office because admin feared the parent. I got to teach and my kids were safe.

Col.John Wm. Reed on January 13, 2011 at 5:35 PM

The real reason for the criticism of Palin’s speech and praise of Obama’s speech by the media?

Palin criticized the media for their shameful behavior. Obama implied the media were right, and Palin needs to behave.

Guess which speech the media likes better.

tom on January 13, 2011 at 5:40 PM

The president’s words were an important contrast to the ugliness that continues to swirl in some parts of the country. The accusation by Sarah Palin that “journalists and pundits” had committed a “blood libel” when they raised questions about overheated rhetoric was especially disturbing, given the grave meaning of that phrase in the history of the Jewish people.

The rag called NY Times has journalists? And when did ugliness come into reporting?

What’s the Paper of Record’s excuse?

Well they operate out of their Press Room. i.e. Garbage bin of DNC.

antisocial on January 13, 2011 at 5:53 PM

The real reason for the criticism of Palin’s speech and praise of Obama’s speech by the media?

Palin criticized the media for their shameful behavior. Obama implied the media were right, and Palin needs to behave.

Guess which speech the media likes better.

tom on January 13, 2011 at 5:40 PM

Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding! This.

Fallon on January 13, 2011 at 5:54 PM

This whole “conservatives are responsible for Tuscon” meme is beginning to get me down. I realize that Obama backed off of it, but his base doesn’t take him seriously when he does things like that or says crazy things like “marriage is between a man and a woman.” The left views such tactics as unavoidably necessary “boob bait for bubbas.”

Krauthammer says it was over by the time Palin spoke. This pathetic line of B.S. in the Times shows that it ain’t close to over. Here comes the “Fairness Doctrine” (aka “Hush Rush”) and all kinds of other intrusions on our liberty based on the aforesaid meme.

It’s far from over, my friends. The fight is just beginning. Guess I’d better man up.

Mr. Big on January 13, 2011 at 6:01 PM

Liberals are incapable of behaving with integrity. There’s no other explanation.

malclave on January 13, 2011 at 6:06 PM

The One didn’t call out the left by name last night

Oh come on Allah! Barry STRADDLED the issue! He was not going to knock his base, he needs them.

GREAT SPEECH my ass! He sounded a somber tone PERIOD. And the New York Fish Wrapper picked up the ball and ran with it. You can be sure the left will continue in the same way. They are NOT part of the problem. Conservatives are the problem! They keep getting in the left’s way.

GarandFan on January 13, 2011 at 6:09 PM

American journalism officially died last week.

The stench from the corpse smells like fish wrapped in a newspaper.

Dhuka on January 13, 2011 at 6:40 PM

Obalmy’s speech was an unmitigated failure because it did nothing to heal my divisions with the Left.

In fact, owing to the reception his speech received on the Left, I feel 100 times more alienated from the ruling class than I did just the day before — and that’s going some in view of how hard the Left was working at alienating me since Saturday.

So, all you jerk-weeds in the Beltway on the right and Left can sing praises to Okenya until the cows come home for his “great” speech, but the fact remains — I have no sense of unity with you and the healing you and he claim to want has not occurred.

Sorry.

FlameWarrior on January 13, 2011 at 6:41 PM

The New York Times praising Obamalinsky for coming out against rhetorical ugliness especially Palin is total hypocrisy. It was their own Paul Krugman who was the first first one to start the hatemongering with his lies and distortions. The NYT are indicative of other MSM libs who are incapable of the truth.

volsense on January 13, 2011 at 6:43 PM

American journalism officially died last week.

The stench from the corpse smells like fish newspaper wrapped in a newspaper.

Dhuka on January 13, 2011 at 6:40 PM

Fixed.

Christien on January 13, 2011 at 6:53 PM

The New York Times praising Obamalinsky for coming out against rhetorical ugliness especially Palin is total hypocrisy. It was their own Paul Krugman who was the first first one to start the hatemongering with his lies and distortions. The NYT are indicative of other MSM libs who are incapable of the truth.

volsense on January 13, 2011 at 6:43 PM

They know that. This is just the double-down move to hope nobody notices the reality.

AnninCA on January 13, 2011 at 7:13 PM

Obalmy’s speech was an unmitigated failure because it did nothing to heal my divisions with the Left.

In fact, owing to the reception his speech received on the Left, I feel 100 times more alienated from the ruling class than I did just the day before — and that’s going some in view of how hard the Left was working at alienating me since Saturday.

I don’t think any president’s speech should be judged on changing people’s votes on him or her.

That’s an impossible standard.

AnninCA on January 13, 2011 at 7:17 PM

The real reason for the criticism of Palin’s speech and praise of Obama’s speech by the media?

Palin criticized the media for their shameful behavior. Obama implied the media were right, and Palin needs to behave.

Guess which speech the media likes better.

tom on January 13, 2011 at 5:40 PM

She rebuked the press. He’s done the same in the past, and he really got blasted, too.

I agree with you. The media hates to be spanked.

She was right, however, and most normal people agreed with her. 56% of people knew that rhetoric had zip to do with this.

And Obama didn’t rebuke her in the least. In fact, he said, “Rhetoric had no effect.”

That is WHY the public liked his speech. That one sentence united people.

He’s now doing to the left press what he did to the left congress. He’s letting them carry the water. They will be hated. Not him.

It’s so easy-peasy to see in my mind. But, the press is falling into the trap, just like Pelosi did.

They’ll lose even more viewership as a result. Fox is already eating them alive. Pretty soon, Fox will have the problem of too much success.

And I honestly think that’s the real plan.

AnninCA on January 13, 2011 at 7:22 PM

This NYT piece is proof positive that Charles Krauthammer got it wrong when he said that Sarah Palin shouldn’t have defended herself. His argument was that there was proof positive that Loughner was not motivated by right-wing speech and therefore, Palin’s case had already been made.

And yet, the NYT is still pushing the ‘narrative’ that it’s Palin’s hateful speech causing all the problems. First they smear her by blaming her for causing the Tucson shooting and now they smear her for pointing out it had nothing whatsoever to do with her.

No doubt if she hadn’t responded they’d now be saying that her current silence is proof that she was responsible for motivating Loughner.

No matter what she does the media will attack her- she might as well put her side of the story out so that that portion of the population not drinking the Kool-Aid can evaluate what she has to say.

If Palin ever did win the Presidency the Left’s reaction- and I include the MSM- will make their opposition to Bush’s years in office seem calm and reasoned by comparison. They just can’t help but attack, attack, attack no matter what she does. It’s completely unhinged.

Jay Mac on January 13, 2011 at 7:23 PM

My prediction?

Fox is on the edge of every news organization’s dream…..dominance. Next, they’ll want respect.

And with that dream will come……the end of Fox as people know it today. The new CNN?

AnninCA on January 13, 2011 at 7:24 PM

No matter what she does the media will attack her- she might as well put her side of the story out so that that portion of the population not drinking the Kool-Aid can evaluate what she has to say.

If Palin ever did win the Presidency the Left’s reaction- and I include the MSM- will make their opposition to Bush’s years in office seem calm and reasoned by comparison. They just can’t help but attack, attack, attack no matter what she does. It’s completely unhinged.

Jay Mac on January 13, 2011 at 7:23 PM

I agree, and that probably informs her, too. One thing I like about her is that she understand she’s divisive.

I think she’s figured this out.

AnninCA on January 13, 2011 at 7:25 PM

I guess I’m in a different world. I honestly don’t understand how these NYT people, and liberals like them, think.

And I begin to despair when conservatives I respect seem to have begun thinking in a ‘through the looking glass, up is down’ bassackwards mentality as well.

Midas on January 13, 2011 at 7:31 PM

tom on January 13, 2011 at 5:40 PM

The media take was my take last night too.

Obama = Slicker than slick Willie or did give a speech for america to meant to pull us together that just divied us more?

Gracelynn on January 13, 2011 at 7:36 PM

Palin is to blame.

Whatever the problem is.

That’s all anyone who doesn’t yet blame her needs to know.

IT’S PALIN’S FAULT.

The media told me so.

profitsbeard on January 13, 2011 at 7:51 PM

Let me get this straight: A mad man, who does not seem to hold any political affiliation – though at least one of his former friends labeled as being “very liberal” and enjoyed spending time reading The Communist Manifesto kills people…

…The Media/Left jump from that to baseless accusations Gov. Sarah Palin as being part of murders which in no demonstrably way had any hand in

Sarah Palin defends herself agianst these empty charges and both the Left and worse, some of the so called “smart people” on the Right then say she was wrong to fight back while praising Obama for doing nothing of substance to counter act his attack dogs for a week.

Oh and every pronounces Sarah Palin’s career over – for a crime she had no hand in!

Yeah, anyone doing this, on either side has taken leave of their senses and lost basis logic. They themselves deserve to be run out of either party for supporting liars.

Sharr on January 13, 2011 at 8:01 PM

I agree, and that probably informs her, too. One thing I like about her is that she understand she’s divisive.

I think she’s figured this out.

AnninCA on January 13, 2011 at 7:25 PM

She’s defending herself and pointing out the hypocrisy of the Left. That’s not divisive. By your logic, all you have to do is make up stories about someone having blood on their hands, and if that person says ANYTHING, then they are divisive. Sorry, that’s voodoo logic.

MrX on January 13, 2011 at 8:32 PM

This is not the time for passivity on the Right.

Bizarro No. 1 on January 13, 2011 at 5:30 PM

I apologize for not giving your question the attention it deserves, and it is entirely my fault that my intent wasn’t clear. You are correct, and there is no need for conservatives to passively accept the accusations that have been made against them.

It was quite clear in our President’s remarks that a more civil tone should be brought to these discussions, and I’m terribly sorry that it wasn’t clear in my earlier remarks. Thank you for allowing me the chance to correct my mistake.

Skandia Recluse on January 13, 2011 at 8:38 PM

This whole episode is a kind of universal litmus test, or rather Rorschach test, some psychological test, that sadly reveals a component of liberal thinking that’s not unlike the delusional thought disorder of schizophrenics who believe there’s something in the air that is controlling them, such as microwaves or other electronic means, or voices, or some other mind control device that works through the air.

With liberals, in this case, their thought disorder is a belief in the existence of some rhetoric in the air, rhetoric which necessarily disagrees with their own thinking, which without any objective evidence whatsoever contributed to a mass murder. And as with schizophrenics, there’s nothing you can say to them to disabuse them of this delusion.

Paul-Cincy on January 13, 2011 at 8:45 PM

I still want to know how the President could call and personally thank Sheriff Dupnik one day, and then, speak about civility the next day. What in the…….????

mobydutch on January 13, 2011 at 8:54 PM

Don’t miss Kirsten Powers’s article in the headlines, saying that Bammie should have been tougher on the lefties. Powers is like that, now and then she gets it right. Ugly comments below though.

If it drops out of headlines: Obama Speech Missed an Opportunity

slickwillie2001 on January 13, 2011 at 9:11 PM

WTF sally’s…..it is all about race…period!

Lets look at the words of: Wright, Rangel, Sharpton, Holder, Clyburn, Waters, Jones, Jackson, Ellison and the countless talking-heads in the media; Goldberg, Robinson, Hill…etc, they can say anything without fear, they can spew the most vile distortions of reality, they can out and out lie and somehow thats ok, thats tolerated. I’m generation 1.5 here in America, my mother fled both the Germans and then the Russians, my fathers parents fled Lenin…and I owe whom what? Pathetic….

All Hail the Messiah

dmann on January 13, 2011 at 9:15 PM

Skandia Recluse on January 13, 2011 at 8:38 PM

|^^^^^^^^^^^^^^| || __
|…BEER TRUCK……….| ||’|”;, ___.
|_…_…_______===|=||_|__|…, ] -
“(@)’(@)”””””**|(@)(@)*****”(@)

OkieDoc on January 13, 2011 at 9:41 PM

Paul-Cincy on January 13, 2011 at 8:45 PM

LOL, good point.
Sort of like AVR?
Otherwise known as,
‘Anthropomorphic Vitriolic Rhetoric’.

OkieDoc on January 13, 2011 at 9:45 PM

I give up on Glenn Beck. As much as I try to listen to him I just can’t anymore. Thanks Glenn for the primer on Soros and the Gang but that’s enough for me…

CCRWM on January 13, 2011 at 10:26 PM

TOGETHER WE THRIVE?…………..Really?

Hot Air contest for the real theme for the last two years of the failed one’s Administration?

TOGETHER WE DRIVE (Our economy in the ditch)

TOGETHER WE STARVE (Food prices going up)

TOGETHER WE FRY (tip of the hat to Global Warming)

TOGETHER WE LIE (all the Czars and All)

TOGETHER WE CRY (About the decline of America)

Any other themes?

PappyD61 on January 13, 2011 at 10:50 PM

Liberals are incapable of behaving with integrity. There’s no other explanation.

malclave on January 13, 2011 at 6:06 PM

Many make up the “rules” on a whim. It appears to have to do with them abandoning God. If there is no lawgiver, then the law is what they feel it is. In reality, there still is a lawgiver for them, but it’s not God. Their lawgiver wants to see us all become as miserable as he is.

scotash on January 14, 2011 at 5:08 AM

But who can prove that “hateful rhetoric” affects anybody to do anything.
Think back to a church in Chicago whose pastor, Jeremiah Wright, screamed out “God Damn America”. A certain parishioner of 20 years, we were told, was totally unaffected.
Maybe I’m wrong about that part … hmmm.

J_Crater on January 14, 2011 at 4:35 PM

People like CK should be called on for cannibalizing their own. Ignoring his perpetual abuse of fellow conservatives is like ignoring the witnessed violence of spousal or child abuse.

atiem on January 14, 2011 at 7:30 PM

teh Won has changed his TPOUS reading to a more “nuanced” phrasing. Instead of outright lies he now uses the “but” construction.

With lies, the speaker must rely on lame stream media to spin the “sense” of the words. With the “but” construction, a reasonable statement may be made and immediately canceled by what follows the “but”. E.g. “Our opponents have principles but we have more humane principles.” With the “but” construction, selective editing can show his balance. A more dependable exercise.

The “but” construction is not new. It is being brought forward as D’rats realize they have to use all dishonesty to forward their agenda. And too much is still not enough.

Just as playing of different lies, “cards”, no longer is believed, so “brilliant speeches” are getting criticized. The “content” is still the same but adulation must continue or the Emperor has no clothes. Change of tactics only.

Caststeel on January 14, 2011 at 9:59 PM

Every media type out there is calling for a toning down of the rhetoric, but they never give out any specifics other than SP’s bullseye map. They always speak in generalities and move on to the next event. Would someone ask them what did the President say in his speech. Don’t let them read it, just answer the question. Nobody remembers a word, just that it was great. They had the comments ready before he was finished.

Kissmygrits on January 15, 2011 at 9:48 AM

Heh!

Obama got a new speechwriter

Thanks American Thinker.

Caststeel on January 16, 2011 at 6:29 PM

Comment pages: 1 2