Posted on 11/13/2010 12:37:05 AM PST by indianrightwinger
Obama: ‘What About Compliments?’ Advance copy from the November 22, 2010, issue. William Kristol November 12, 2010 4:00 PM
At his November 12 press conference in Seoul, President Obama was asked the following question by CBS’s Chip Reid: “What was the number-one complaint, concern, or piece of advice that you got from foreign leaders about the U.S. economy and your stewardship of the economy?”
Whereupon the president began his response with a complaint: “What about compliments?” he asked. “You didn’t put that in the list.”
Well, soorrrrrry, Mr. President.
Poor President Obama. He’s (allegedly) getting all these compliments from his fellow world leaders—and the press just isn’t interested in having him tell us about them. True, President Obama became accustomed, as a candidate, to having a compliant press corps. But even so. After a contentious economic summit where the president was forced to defend the Fed’s ill-advised monetary policies, a summit that followed on the heels of the biggest midterm electoral defeat ever suffered by an elected first-term president, a defeat partly due to his ill-advised fiscal policies, did Obama really expect a reporter to stand up at the end of last week and ask, “Mr. President, what compliments did you receive from foreign leaders?”
That is, apparently, exactly what the president expected.
And that has us worried. We’ve assumed the president would learn from the voters’ repudiation of his party on November 2. We’ve assumed he would learn from reality’s refutation of his policies over the last two years. But the vanity that Jonathan V. Last elaborates on elsewhere in this issue seems to be standing in the way of such learning. President Obama has been mugged both by the voters and by reality—but he thinks that he’s still looking good, that he deserves plaudits, and
(Excerpt) Read more at weeklystandard.com ...
I agree. I’ve been praying these things for a while now. Saul of Tarsus found his way...
I thought he was the Law Review president, not editor. The president of the LR is a social appointment - the editor had to do actual work. Still, I don’t believe he contributed to the Review.
Wow, really? I need to catch up. That’s pathetic and telling. Wow.
Thanks for the correction. And yes, he contributed nothing to the Review. His volume (no. 104) holds the distinction of being the least cited over the previous two decades. Furthermore, every HLR President typically goes on to clerk for a US appellate court judge. Obama didn’t even receive a single offer.
. . . Until the 1970's the editors were picked on the basis of grades, and the president of the Law Review was the student with the highest academic rank. Among these were Elliot L. Richardson, the former Attorney General, and Irwin Griswold, a dean of the Harvard Law School and Solicitor General under Presidents Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard M. Nixon.
That system came under attack in the 1970's and was replaced by a program in which about half the editors are chosen for their grades and the other half are chosen by fellow students after a special writing competition. The new system, disputed when it began, was meant to help insure that minority students became editors of The Law Review.
Sounds like affirmative action to me.
Thanks for the extra info... no surprise. He was a placeholder. I pray the amount of harm he’s doing will diminish to the point where he can be seen as a placeholder in the White House as well.
I suppose 0’s winning writing competition entry (/s) is protected from public view by a million dollars worth of attorneys, too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.