This CNN panel lives in an alternate universe (Planet Zog?)
Or maybe they are just totally drunk on Obama Kool-Aid.
Via NewsBusters:
Following President Obama’s Sunday night address, the always large post-event panel on CNN had plenty to say, but it was quite the disconnect as many of their political commentators hailed the “straightforward” speech by the President while two of their foreign policy analysts panned the President’s “self-congratulation” and having “his head…in the clouds if he thinks this current strategy is going to succeed.”
In the moments after the speech, Jake Tapper, Gloria Borger, and John King offered up largely complimentary thoughts on the speech with Borger observing that she’s “never heard this language from the President before” as “he challenged Congress, not only on assault weapons, but vote for the use of force against ISIS” and “pledged we will destroy” the Islamic terror group.
Perhaps the most dramatic contrast came moments later when host Wolf Blitzer turned to author and Daily Beast writer Michael Weiss for perspective on ISIS and a prediction on how they will “likely to react to the President’s address.” What followed was nearly three-minutes of uninterrupted excoriation of the President that began with Weiss answering Blitzer’s question by stating flatly that “I think they’ll laugh, frankly” as what “heard in the President’s remarks self-congratulation and cheerleading.” Tearing into the President’s so-called strategy, Weiss exposed the disconnect between Obama and his own military advisers:
….Speaking from London, senior international correspondent Clarissa Ward gave her quick thoughts after a break and largely brushed off a question from Blitzer asking if the President’s speech will cause world leaders to become more united behind him against ISIS:
[Y]ou’re going to hear, you know, people supporting, coming out, leaders saying that they support what the President said, but you’re not going to really see much in terms of a major reaction because there was nothing that President Obama said here that deviated from what we’ve heard him say many times before. He essentially reiterated the U.S.’s current strategy for dealing with ISIS.
Related:
Fox News: Intelligence report commissioned by White House says ISIS not contained
It was a strong speech—for Obama. Therein lies the problem.
Remember in Paris after the attacks Obama said he wanted to make “a few brief remarks” which he did in a lackluster manner. He said we’re going to do whatever it takes, working with others, to bring these terrorists to justice. He called the slaughter of over 100 innocent people a setback.
Last night he used the word “war” about 10 times and “terrorists”/”terrorism” about 20 times. He characterized radicalization as “embracing a perverted interpretation of Islam”, i.e., he made as direct an association between terrorism and Islam as he ever will. He placed a responsibility on the shoulders of Muslims to root out misguided ideas leading to radicalization. He called Fort Hood a terrorist attack knowing it was the first time he’s done so and therefore purposely for the impact. He phrased Congressional support for military action as though he’s the one chomping at the bit for battle with ISIS with a squeamish Congress as reluctant. He bragged about ordering military actions.
To his media supporters remarks like that coming out of Obama’s mouth are considered Pattonesque. Take that you critics of his mettle!
What the rest of us heard last night was the same old rationalizing that his slow grind strategy will ultimately prevail. We shall overcome some day. Tell that to the Syrian refugees. Seriously. Tell them to wait, eventually things will be better.
So I just skimmed Obama’s speech (had to watch paint dry last night). He actually said this: “For seven years, I’ve confronted this evolving threat each morning in my intelligence briefing.” I’m assuming that he’s referring to the possibility of the truth being told.
He also referenced his daughters (good job on keeping his children out of politics) and he ‘challenged’ Congress “to authorize the continued military force against these terrorists”. Ummm, who has been saying up to now that no new military authorization was needed? Can’t the legacy media even challenge Obama on that disconnect? Rhetorical question.
Other ‘super’ statements: “Here’s what else we cannot do….we are on the right side of history. We were founded upon a belief in human dignity…let’s make sure we never forget what makes us exceptional…”
What a leader, a National Address to tell his countrymen that history approves of doing nothing. US was founded on religious freedom. (assuming the human dignity line is a shoutout to BLM) The referencing of exceptional is a nice poke in the eye. Obama believes in US exceptionalism and that exceptionalism is exemplified by not doing. The King on parade yelling at the viewers, You have no clothes on.
Re the press going through the SB home. Contrast to when Obama said you can’t fly over the BP oil spill and take photos, and the press dutifully complied.
Good for the CNN foreign correspondents. Where was Christiane Amanpour? Will any legacy media followup and ask the SB families what they thought of speech? How about asking the French? They just had a vote. Somehow a pic of Obama, Hollande, and Merkel together right now, is not going to evoke The Magi.
French media are calling yesterday’s vote, Le Choc (The Shock). Nice allusion to The Scream. http://www.dw.com/en/le-choc-le-pens-party-gains-in-frances-regional-polls/a-18898695