Obama on Speech Delay: "We are Not Amused."

By Proof

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

According to Politico, not amused at all!

It seemed like a trivial matter: On Wednesday, House Republicans forced the president to delay his speech to a joint session of Congress by one day.

Who cares? The White House cares. Very much.

“It is a big deal that the House said ‘no’ to the president from our end,” a White House source with intimate knowledge of what took place between the House and the president told me Thursday. “This confirms what we all know: They will do anything in the House to muck us up.”

Is it just me? Or do the echoes of Rahm Emanuel suggest that the word they used wasn't "muck"?

On Wednesday, the White House staff did not know exactly what President Barack Obama was going to say in his major jobs speech, but it knew exactly where and when he was going to say it.

The location would be before a joint session of Congress in the august marble-clad chamber of the House of Representatives. And the speech would be next Wednesday night, when the House returned from vacation, and there would be maximum TV viewership.

I don't know if anyone is expecting anything other than warmed over platitudes, "I feel your pain" and suggestions to spend yet more millions if not trillions of federal dollars to borrow our way to prosperity.

But, if the speech really were important or substantive, why the delays? First of all, I heard a suggestion today that Obama might try to deliver the speech in a thirty minute slot before the kick off of the NFL season. If this is true, it is quite damning on many levels.

First, it suggests that it is once more an exhibition of petty gamesmanship on Obama's part. Aside from the fact that Obama and his teleprompter very seldom can say anything in under thirty minutes, this would seem to preclude any time for a rebuttal from the Republicans. Second, How substantive or comprehensive could it be if he can spell it out in thirty minutes or less. What is he? Delivering a pizza?

And third, if he could spell it out in thirty minutes or less, are you telling me that he could not delay his ten day vacation in Martha's Vineyard for thirty freaking minutes to lay out a plan to turn the nation's economy around?

And what's the BFD, as Joe Biden would say, about addressing a joint session of Congress? If he can lay it out in thirty minutes or less, make your speech from the Oval Office and let the weight of your ideas carry the day.

And then it hit me. Why the need to address the joint session of Congress, other than to screw with the Republicans and their presidential debate? It is this:

There will be so little substance to the President's speech, that he needed a studio audience to give him standing ovations and applause to make his lackluster ideas, platitudes and spending proposals sound more impressive than they really are.

This is Obama’s M.O. His Styrofoam Greek columns writ large. Remember his speech in front of 10 Downing Street address? He wasn’t visiting any British head of state, he was just using it as a backdrop for his campaign.

This guy Obama is a world class phony and poseur. God help the United States of America.

H/T Memeorandum

Cross posted at Proof Positive


  1. Yes, I believe you are correct. Absolutely.

  2. And I take no joy in it. Remember when America had a real president?

  3. No, actually, I don't. I'm too young for that. I'm not convinced that GW Bush was great for the nation; Clearly Clinton was not. And I was a kid before that. America hasn't had a president that loves the Constitution, a president who could allow the "weight of his ideas to carry the day," for a very, very long old time.

  4. "I'm too young for that." One of the advantages of being older. I voted for Reagan - twice.

  5. "I voted for Reagan - twice."

    I'd boast about that too, if I could.

  6. RK: Back then, it was "Morning in America", not "Mourning in America".

  7. @Proof, No I don't really remember a real President... Oh wait! I vaguely remember a man named Ronald Reagan... But what stands out most was the "economic prosperity" that lasted longer than he did...
    May the memory of him endure longer than those that enjoyed his efforts!

  8. I only voted for Reagan once for I wasn't old enough in 1980. As for the speech, is anyone really listening to him any more? Everything out of his mouth has been a lie or a call for more socialism which, as in every case in the past, proven to be a complete failure. All people care about now is the pebble in their shoe and nobody has been interested in removing it, especially this administration. I rather take a pen, spear my eardrum and dance the hooky poky than listen to anything more than what this bore has to say. Everyone one of his speeches should come with a cyanide capsule.


Commenting here is a privilege, not a right. Comments that contain cursing or insults and those failing to add to the discussion will be summarily deleted.