Comments on: Obama’s Primetime Defense of Healthcare, and the Curious Case of the “Socialist” Market of Ideas

By: ACG

ACG — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 03:08:09 +0000

The point isn’t about “power,” and you’re making the wrong comparison. It’s not that talk radio could silence Obama or vice versa. It’s that asking Obama to provide time for opposition is logically equivalent to asking talk radio to provide time for rebuttal. Different scales, yes, but same argument.

By: Craig

Craig — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 03:01:10 +0000

There’s no comparison here. The President has disproporionate power. He will not be driven off the air the way talk show hosts will be who have to make a living presenting programing people want to listen to.
Also, the notion that people are “sold on the idea” of this health care mess being proposed in pure fiction.
As it turned out, the President forwarded a blizzard of obfuscations and generalities, and probably did more damage than any rebuttal could have anyway. The main objection is how little criticism there is coming from the press. Not surprising, however. Will learn to live with it.

By: ACG

ACG — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 17:53:55 +0000

HAH. I’d forgotten the “Fairness Doctrine” point. You’re so right. Epic GOP fail.

By: Oneiroi

Oneiroi — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:42:27 +0000

Since the executive doesn’t have much power (well, it keeps ratcheting up), one of their only bully pulpits for pushing legislation is their standing as president and their place in the public sphere.

I mean, I know it’s aggravating to Republicans, as John Stewart said, “it’s supposed to taste like a shit taco”, but I’m kind of glad that at least he tries to go to the public and defend decisions and tries to explain what he’s doing. Which I think is different than the last.

And there will continue to be many rebuttals in the news. And to think, it felt like yesterday Republicans were scared of the boogey man of the fairness doctrine.

By: Philip H

Philip H — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 14:39:41 +0000

And you rpoint would be . . . what, republicans are two faced inthat they clamour for the very thing they claim to detest? Nah, can’t believe it . . . .