Posted on 05/27/2009 2:09:23 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Even as he declared, “There are many things I like and many things I don’t like” about the Obama administration’s first few months in office, the editorial page editor of The New York Times called Barack Obama “the most extraordinary president of my lifetime.”
“If nothing else, the Republican Party’s hysterical reaction to everything he does and says is testament to that fact,” said Andrew Rosenthal.
Obama was a central topic of Rosenthal’s May 19 talk from the bima of Temple B’nai Abraham in Livingston, where the Montclair resident delivered a broad-ranging address interrupted by frequent laughter.
“What is amazing about Obama is his incredible sense of calm,” said Rosenthal. “I think it conveys a real sense of leadership.”
A Washington correspondent and news editor at the paper before moving to its editorial section in 2003, Rosenthal said Obama continues to confound his critics.
“Obama is governing the way he said he would during the campaign,” Rosenthal said. “He was never as liberal as the Right claimed he was or as conservative as the Left hoped he was.”
But, Rosenthal said, Obama’s “attempt to govern in a bipartisan fashion” is the president’s greatest weakness.
“If he is pandering to anyone, it is the Right, not the Left. It is costing him.”
In any case, said Rosenthal, “the Republicans have no intention of working with him. This apparently is their master plan.
“In 2008, the Republicans lost the election. In 2009, they’ve lost their minds. The Grand Old Party seems to be in the grip of a fringe group of crazy people who dozed right through the election.”
But it wasn’t all praise for the president.
“Obama is not doing very well in dealing with the detainees imprisoned in Guantanamo,” said Rosenthal. He criticized the president’s refusal to investigate members of the Bush administration on charges that they ordered and approved of torture.
“Obama got stuck with a lot of messes George Bush created. But you can’t fix things if you don’t know how they’re broken.
“I think our democracy is strong, and we can take the investigation, even if it leads to some pretty prominent people being indicted. Yes, I admit I have the occasional fantasy of Dick Cheney being frog-marched down Pennsylvania Avenue,” he said.
Turning to the Middle East, Rosenthal said the president and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are making a genuine effort to get the United States engaged in ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
“The gulf in the room between Obama and Bibi Netanyahu was palpable,” he said, referring to last week’s meeting between the president and the Israeli premier. “Probably the best thing Obama can do is just stay engaged and nudge where he can, to remind people there are agreements on the books, and avoid the trap of moral equivalency.”
Rosenthal used the editorial “we” in referring to how the Times’ editorial pages view the situation.
“We think it is clearly in Israel’s interest to stop building settlements. Netanyahu apparently does not agree. He was talking about Palestinian self-government, not a Palestinian state. We still think, foolishly perhaps, it is possible to have two states there,” he said.
He said there were “suggestions that Netanyahu is going to press for a military solution in Iran. I think all indications are that Obama is going to resist that.”
He said a military attack on Iran “won’t work. There is not nearly enough intelligence on the Iranian nuclear program for a strike to be effective, and it would embroil everyone in another dangerous war, and Iran is stronger than ever, thanks to George Bush and the war in Iraq.”
Asked by an audience member whether he believed his newspaper to be “balanced” on the subject of Israel, Rosenthal said, “Generally our news coverage is, yes.
“The problem is there is no balance in this subject. There is no middle ground. Everybody has to take sides,” he said.
Rosenthal referred to an incident in 2002, when front-page coverage of the large Salute to Israel Parade in Manhattan was illustrated with a photograph of a small Palestinian counter-demonstration.
Seven years later, he said, that choice is still being roundly criticized as a prime example of the Times’ alleged bias against Israel.
“It was a weird overreaction by the foreign desk,” said Rosenthal, explaining why the newspaper’s front page had no picture of the vast crowd of pro-Israel parade-goers. The foreign desk “felt they wanted to balance the coverage by showing the protestors. But some stories don’t have balance. Some stories are 80-20.”
Hard Times?
Given the desperate financial state of many American newspapers, Andrew Rosenthal was asked to speculate on the possible demise of The New York Times.
“I don’t think you can live without it,” he said. “The bottom line is the Times itself is very solid, very steady, and quite profitable,” although “we have been hit by enormous drops in advertising.”
Rosenthal said the newspaper “was on the verge of coming to some decisions on ways to get payment from readers and others who profit from what we do” on the web.
But, he assured the audience, “we are not on the verge of bankruptcy. We are not in default of our loans. We have all the money we need until 2013, and if the recession is not over by 2013, this whole conversation is pointless.”
Well, if that's the measure, then Obama doesn't hold a candle to GWB.
Idiotorial where the writer admits to cutting off his nose to spite his face. He'd rather see Republicans distraught over the end of the American Way than realize that a castrated (and Nationalized) America 2.0 is good for no one.
Huh?
Well, by that standard GWB and RWR are #1 and #2 on the presidential scale based on the hissy fits thrown by the fags at the NY Times and the Donkey party.
I think it’s something in their water supply. That would explain a lot.
“the most extraordinary president of my lifetime.”
for sure!....The most extraordinary whack left radical socialist in American history....YOU BET HE IS!
So the left hoped he was more conservative?
Seriously, did these people pay any money to hear this idiot make statements this freaking stupid?
What a moron.
Is the sky blue?
If his father, Abe Rosenthal were still alive, he would smack his mouth. As it is, he’s prolly turning over in his grave. Abe may have been a lib, but he knew how to be a journalist also...
“’What is amazing about Obama is his incredible sense of calm,’ said Rosenthal. ‘I think it conveys a real sense of leadership’”
I never know what the heck people are talking about with Obama’s calmness. Is there some clip out there of Bush foaming at the mouth I missed? Did Clinton fly off the handle and say to the press “Y’all a bunch of bitches!”? When did Reagan unleash a Howard Dean yell?
It’s true that you could read Bush’s face and intonation like a book, and that it was obvious when he was loath to answer a question. I don’t know about you, but I can tell when Obama’s annoyed, too. He doesn’t have a perpetual poker face. Maybe he’s marginally less easy to read than Bush. But come on. He’s not preternaturally calm. You’re making that up.
I need to get a list of the liberal bookstores in my town.
I was in one independent owned bookstore (with loads of Bush Bashing books) and overheard an exchange between a customer and the clerk. He was buying a Sunday New York Times but asked if it was an incomplete paper as surely it should be thicker than "that". And the clerk thumbed through the sections baffled at just how this could be.
Eventually they both just said "huh" and proceeded with the sale.
I'd like to go around to a number of stores some Sunday and repeat this conversation only decide against buying it. "I need more than that to wrap MY fish...", "...to catch my paint drippings...", "...to train my puppy..."
Nah..Rosenthal was always left wing. But he had a better Op Ed page than the current crop of crazies.
Rosenthal lived through the Reagan years. It was torture for him. =) It was the happiest days of my life. My daughter was born. I hit .500 and led my softball team to a championship and I laughed at liberals as if they were rodents. Good times.
Just because the MSM didn't air the clips doesn't mean that there isn't video of them.
I voted Democrat because I love the fact that I can now marry whatever I want. I’ve decided to marry my horse.
I voted Democrat because I believe oil companies’ profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene but the government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn’t.
I voted Democrat because I believe the government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would.
I voted Democrat because Freedom of Speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it.
I voted Democrat because when we pull out of Iraq I trust that the bad guys will stop what they are doing because they now think we are good people and they have a sympathizer in the White House and in the US Liberal Congress.
I voted Democrat because I’m way too irresponsible to own a gun, and I know that my local police are all I need to protect me from murderers and thieves.
I voted Democrat because I believe that people who can’t tell us if it will rain on Friday can tell us that the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don’t start driving a Prius.
I voted Democrat because I’m not concerned about the slaughter of millions of babies so long as we keep all death row inmates alive.
I voted Democrat because I think illegal aliens have a right to free health care, education, and Social Security benefits.
I voted Democrat because I believe that business should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the government for redistribution as the democrats see fit.
I voted Democrat because I believe liberal judges need to rewrite The Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who would never get their agendas past the voters.
I voted Democrat because my head is so firmly planted up my rear that it is unlikely that I’ll ever have another point of view.
fixed. Either version has homoerotic overtones of dominance and subjugation.
The observation quite a few made last week when Obama gave his speech about Guantanamo was that he was mad.
Rosenthal is the son of the former New York Times executive editor A.M. Rosenthal.[1]
Andrew Rosenthal became editorial page editor on January 8, 2007.
Prior to joining the Times in March 1987, Rosenthal worked at the Associated Press, where he served as Moscow bureau chief. Rosenthal graduated from the University of Denver with a B.A. degree in American history in 1978.
Pinch must be very comfortable with another underperforming scion as Editor.
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.