WWTBAM Bored

Where is his first loyalty? Hmmmm???? Some may say "So what?" but he KNOWS this will piss off some Americans. But, he would rather make the Middle Easterners happy, I guess, than his constituents.

Of course, I guess this is better than going on The View.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch ... ob-10.html

President Obama Does First Formal TV Interview as President with Al-Arabiya
January 26, 2009 6:29 PM

As special envoy to the Middle East, George Mitchell heads off to the region to begin work on negotiating a cease fire between Israel and the Palestinians, President Obama has sat for his first formal TV interview with the Arabic cable TV network Al-Arabiya, ABC News has learned.

The interview was taped this evening and is set to air at 11 pm ET, as Mitchell is in the air and on his way to the region.

Based in Dubai, Al-Arabiya estimates that it has a potential audience exceeding 23 million in the Gulf region.

-- jpt

I fully support his decision. It makes perfect sense.

BackInTex wrote:Where is his first loyalty? Hmmmm???? Some may say "So what?" but he KNOWS this will piss off some Americans. But, he would rather make the Middle Easterners happy, I guess, than his constituents.

The President of the United States is routinely interviewed by dozens of foreign TV/news outlets, often in connection with current events such as an impending trip to a particular region. With the US dispaching a peace envoy to the Middle East, it should come as no surprise that Obama would grant this interview.

From what I heard, the interview was designed as part of a PR campaign to improve relations in that part of the world, an area in which Bush was badly deficient. It was also fairly noncontroversial. Obama said the US was not the enemy of the Muslim world but would continue to hunt down terrorists.

Despite what Bush attempted to do, we can't invade, buy off, or give the cold shoulder to the entire Muslim world. We have to improve relations with these countries while at the same time protecting our own and Israel's security interests. It's not an easy task, but it certainly can't be done by a retreat to Bush's jingoistic mindset and worrying about "pissing off" the Rush Limbaugh crowd.

I have my doubts what Obama is actually going to accomplish in the Middle East, especially if there is another major flareup of violence or diplomatic crisis, but talking is what he does best. Judge him for what he does, not for his interviews.

I don't have a problem with this either.

I agree with SSS that this was Bush's major failure in the Middle East...an utter lack of an effort to "win hearts and minds".

I know that's anathema to the Wilsonian interventionists that have invaded the Republican party and poisoned its foreign policy over the past eight years, but it's something that needs to be done.

Let's see if Obama can do it.

What Jeemie said.

Whats the problem?

silverscreenselect wrote:I have my doubts what Obama is actually going to accomplish in the Middle East ...

I have my doubts what anyone CAN accomplish there, given the level of animosity and the poisoning of what is now the fourth generation of young minds with the crapola (and that isn't the word I'm thinking of) that has been taught in most of the schools in the Arabic countries. The terrorist organizations have learned how to use propaganda to their advantage in demonizing the U.S. It's about time that the U.S., long the masters of propaganda, try to return the favor and tell "the street" just what can be gained through diplomacy and peace and the repudiation of those organizations.

I believe the phrase is:

The lord works in mysterious ways.

peacock2121 wrote:Whats the problem?

Arabs first.

You never get a second chance to make a first impression.

Our President will never get a second chance to grant a first interview.

Do you not wonder how many folks were asking to interview him? Do you not wonder why he chose this one? Who was he trying to please (because you know he thought about it, and he had a choice)?

Considering much of the angst with his candidacy was a perception he was a closet Muslim you'd think he'd at least try to give the impression he prefers Americans over Arabs.

Blago's hogging all the American cameras these days.

Now THERE'S a real head case...

BackInTex wrote:

peacock2121 wrote:Whats the problem?

Arabs first.

You never get a second chance to make a first impression.

Our President will never get a second chance to grant a first interview.

Do you not wonder how many folks were asking to interview him? Do you not wonder why he chose this one? Who was he trying to please (because you know he thought about it, and he had a choice)?

Considering much of the angst with his candidacy was a perception he was a closet Muslim you'd think he'd at least try to give the impression he prefers Americans over Arabs.

So he chooses to grant an interview with an Arab network, and this shows he prefers Arabs to Americans?

I dislike Obama as much as anyone, but this whole "closet Muslim" thing is probably the dumbest reason to dislike him.

Trying to sort out the Middle East is probably one of the BEST WAYS Obama can show he "prefers Americans".

We need to get over the xenophobia which has informed neo-con foreign policy over the past eight years and go back to the type of foreign policy I thought I was getting when Bush first took office.

I don't have the highest hopes that Obama will take us there...but one thing he is is pragmatic...so perhaps there is a chance for RealPolitik to emerge again as our dominant foreign policy mode.

BackInTex wrote:Considering much of the angst with his candidacy was a perception he was a closet Muslim you'd think he'd at least try to give the impression he prefers Americans over Arabs.

Are you serious?

Like he's never given an interview to the American media before?

Meanwhile, SSS has been complaining that two, three, four days--a whole week now!--has gone by in this administration and all the statements from the White House have just been so much talk without any real action yet.

BackInTex wrote:

peacock2121 wrote:Whats the problem?

Arabs first.

You never get a second chance to make a first impression.

Our President will never get a second chance to grant a first interview.

Given his exposure over the last eighteen months, I hardly consider this a first interview. Just because he's finally the President doesn't change what he's going to say to the American audience. What, did you want him to go on Oprah, or to give Baba Wawa a chance to ask him what kind of tree he'd be?

The Middle East is the number one hotspot in the world right now. There are others, certainly, but the region has a huge lead in that regard. It hurts nothing to get started early if he wants to make any significant progress in generating peace during his administration. And taking his words to the general populace though their major media source was IMO an excellent beginning.

Most of the people who think he's a closet Muslim wouldn't be satisfied if he got baptized by the Pope in the Reflecting Pool of the National Mall with as much media coverage as the inauguration. Tough.

Jeemie wrote:So he chooses to grant an interview with an Arab network, and this shows he prefers Arabs to Americans?

He chose to grant an interview with an Arab network over an American network.

Unless you think there have been no requests for interviews from American networks. I guess, after last week, they could be tired of him already. NOT!

He could have granted the Arab network interview, but right after granting an American one. But he didn't.

Little messages, but not without meaning. Ignore if you wish.

I changed your header to make it fit the sentiment better.

BackInTex wrote: Little messages, but not without meaning. Ignore if you wish.

Better start passing around the petition to impeach him, on charges of treason.

BackInTex wrote:

Jeemie wrote:So he chooses to grant an interview with an Arab network, and this shows he prefers Arabs to Americans?

He chose to grant an interview with an Arab network over an American network.

Unless you think there have been no requests for interviews from American networks. I guess, after last week, they could be tired of him already. NOT!

He could have granted the Arab network interview, but right after granting an American one. But he didn't.

Little messages, but not without meaning. Ignore if you wish.

Yes- the message is- Obama thinks the previous administration damaged our reputation in a key region of the world, and he's making it a priority to try and repair it.

But I'm sure there are many out there who think it's because he's a closet Muslim.

They're welcome to think that way if they wish. I think it only continues to marginalize them if they think so...which is too bad because, as I said, there are pletny of legitimate reasons to get on Obama. But as usual, his opponents choose to lead with the kookiest ones.

And they wonder why they're on the outside looking in...

While it is the prerogative of any new Administration to implement it's own policies - they won the election, they get their voice - undoing all the policies of the previous one can and will bite one in the a$$.

Obama's opening of previous Presidential files at the sitting President's discretion will come home to roost. But he did have to appease the Bush Administration witchhunters.

Gonna suck in four or eight years when the table is turned again.

Oh, and I see a lack of comments about the publicized 'ethics in this Administration' to include no lobbyists unless Obama grants a waiver.

Which he did to his selection for Deputy Secretary of Defense.

Change we can believe in?

I don't mind a politician being a politician, it's the hype and hypocrisy that irritates.

That and the majority of the press fawning over the guy. There were, during the campaign, very few substantive looks at the man unlike those done to Republicans or even Hillary.

And the fawning, to use a polite term, continues today.

Honeymoon or worship, I get the terms confused sometimes...

Flybrick wrote: Honeymoon or worship, I get the terms confused sometimes...

Just call it hope.

And what am I hoping for?


To my point, what is the press hoping for? Is that the role of the press?

Flybrick wrote:And what am I hoping for?


To my point, what is the press hoping for? Is that the role of the press?

I am hoping for scritches!

When is The Anointed One going to get around to that for me.....?

Flybrick wrote:And what am I hoping for?


To my point, what is the press hoping for? Is that the role of the press?

I have no idea what you're hoping for. If everything is peachy-keen in your world and you have nothing to hope for, well good for you.

Some of us are hoping for a vague notion of "better". I can't speak for the whole world, obviously. (Clearly? )

And the role of the press is to merely report. Some have forgotten that.

Evil Squirrel wrote:

Flybrick wrote:And what am I hoping for?


To my point, what is the press hoping for? Is that the role of the press?

I am hoping for scritches!

When is The Anointed One going to get around to that for me.....?

You need a better lobbyist.

It could be worse: he could have granted the first interview to Pat Robertson.

minimetoo26 wrote:
I have no idea what you're hoping for. If everything is peachy-keen in your world and you have nothing to hope for, well good for you.

Some of us are hoping for a vague notion of "better". I can't speak for the whole world, obviously. (Clearly? )

And the role of the press is to merely report. Some have forgotten that.

For the things I want to be better in my world, am I to count on the government to fix?

For the American economy, specifically, am I to rely on the government to fix?

If that is your contention, I don't know that it is, but it would appear so, then we have different expectations of government as well as the proper role of government.

Please, tell me what you expect the government to do regarding either the economy or your personal world.

Regarding the press, do we agree on something? Or did I miss your intent? If some have forgotten that, to whom do you refer?