Obama Vows Action On Economy ASAP In Weekly You Tube Address

It is not a master stroke, but a public relations gimmick to appeal to the younger crowd (and the, ahem, "young at heart" who should be more grown up about this). It is simply another medium that enables Obama to expand the scope of his statements that he makes, as well as (say those of us who are more grown up and more observant) a means of control of the press as well as dissemination of information.

People should not be dot-com-bubble-brained about what is merely the next medium or realm of information distribution and exchange.

Plenty of people will listen to Obama on the radio, if we happen to be on the road. If fewer people do this than expected or desired, one reason may be the poor quality of programming (which has _nothing_ to do with any "old" technical nature of radio itself), because radio station or network management would rather play info-mercials about health-nut products with miraculous powers and claims that are not verified or approved by the FDA, for example.

[scowl]

> And what better example of the new weekly You Tube address to offer than today’s.

Does not follow in the way you claim, no matter how many kids may side with you, but your statement is actually correct insofar as you are hyping something again.

> In it, Obama:
>
> 1. Says action must be taken on the economy ASAP.
> 2. Makes a pitch for bipartisanship, for Americans to put aside partisanship and work on solutions together.
> 3. Makes it clear he will seek support from both sides of the aisle.

Nothing new, and nothing that amazes or excites or reassures anyone. What did you expect him to say otherwise?

As to what he said that you neglected, i.e., some of the details, they include creation of new jobs, which is feel-good paternalistic stuff, and anything "green" is just dreaming and appealing to the kids while discussing infrastructure smacks of 1930s make-work, but would appeal to the grown-ups, because substandard, aging roads and bridges do need repair and replacement throughout this country.

Geez, DLS, give the guy a break! The weekly radio address is a decades-old tradition, and yes, it is one-sided, patronizing, jingoistic, and generic. That's what they are. That's what they [i]all[/i] are! All he's doing is putting it on YouTube. It's up to the press, and the opposition, to post their rebuttals.

All Obama is trying to do is utilize another communication medium to reach the people, just like presidents have done before him with radio and television.

As far as this particular Tubecast, it is still far too early in his presidency (which is officially measured as -59 days old) to get all critical. It's like complaining that the fetus isn't trying hard enough to get A's in math!

Seriously, let's see what his later addresses have to say. If they all continue to be feel-good Spirit of America stuff, then I'll be with you in my criticism.

DLS said, "It is not a master stroke, but a public relations gimmick to appeal to the younger crowd (and the, ahem, "young at heart" who should be more grown up about this). It is simply another medium that enables Obama to expand the scope of his statements that he makes, as well as (say those of us who are more grown up and more observant) a means of control of the press as well as dissemination of information."

While I agree that calling this a "master stroke" is going a bit far, it's not a public relations gimmick. I think the government needs to let all citizens know what the government plans to do. As communication evolves, so does the need for the government's approach in communicating to us. (As an aside, there was nothing preventing Bush from doing this, but Bush doesn't believe in a transparent government or the need to explain to the citizens of the US what his administration was up to.) By putting this up on the internet, Obama allows all people who are interested in hearing him the opportunity to do so, at the time of their own choosing.

Lastly, I don't know where you get the idea that Obama is controlling the press with this.... these are his words and he is speaking them out of his own mouth. How much more transparent can one get? Bush controlled the press by giving Fox news talking points (which it followed and even admits to following), by hiring shills and by setting up those "news" broadcasts which were actually government propaganda machines. Those examples are just the most blatant and offensive examples. Everything else the Bushies have done to control the press and disseminate government propaganda (including outright lies) would fill an encyclopedia.

As far as specifics..... I think Obama was pretty specific... he said inthe campaign he wanted to rebuild roads and bridges, which would repair our failing infrastructure (the next time you're on the interstate crossing a river remember what happened to that I-35 bridge (a major artery) in Minneapolis and ask yourself how long was that bridge (that you're currently on) was built and when was the last time it underwent a major overhaul.... chances are it is in need of repair.... And of course having government spend money on infrastructure would stimulate the economy (and help keep people in their homes).

Obama doesn't need to bring up anything new at this point (he's not even the president) because he has plenty of good ideas which he's talked about already. He just needs to implement them once he gets into office. But people in this country are looking for a leader to give them reassurance. That would normally be President Bush, but he's out to lunch at the moment. So people are looking (which I don't really agree with) to Obama for reassurance. So Obama is now in a position of needing to take on the president's role, without usurping the actual president's responsibilities or diminishing him. Obama has no authority here to actually do things (I think he's already given up his senate seat or is about to). Obama is on a tightrope and if Obama goes any further he'll fall off and be accused of meddling (and rightly so).

What would you have Obama do?

It's not what I would have Obama do -- my gripe was the obscession with gadgetry (it actually could be heard on the radio, too) and that what should have been the issue were the details of what Obama said. (the 2.5 million jobs goal, that kind of detail.) It should have been those _specific_details_ that should have been the object of interest here. That he's giving an address is to be commended; he actually doesn't owe one to anybody (despite the hype and panic expressed on CNN that he "needs" to tell us something, as if he were our parent, or FDR in the Great Depression, both of which are ridiculous to conceive). But he did give an address to give us another early first hint at things to come (as in his first press conference) and these items, rather than generalities, should have begun this thread. Fixating to a silly degree about YouTube (itself named in a modernly sloppy way) is no more intelligent or important than discussing Hillary Clinton's choice of pants versus a dress when speaking publicly.

...

[New York Times, spelling and punctuation verbatim]

Good morning.

The news this week has only reinforced the fact that we are facing an economic crisis of historic proportions. Financial markets faced more turmoil. New home purchases in October were the lowest in half a century. Five-hundred-forty-thousand more jobless claims were filed last week, the highest in 18 years. And we now risk falling into a deflationary spiral that could increase our massive debt even further.

While I’m pleased that Congress passed a long-overdue extension of unemployment benefits this week, we must do more to put people back to work and get our economy moving again. We have now lost 1.2 million jobs this year, and if we don’t act swiftly and boldly, most experts now believe that we could lose millions of jobs next year.

There are no quick or easy fixes to this crisis, which has been many years in the making, and it’s likely to get worse before it gets better. But January 20th is our chance to begin anew — with a new direction, new ideas, and new reforms that will create jobs and fuel long-term economic growth.

I have already directed my economic team to come up with an Economic Recovery Plan that will mean 2.5 million more jobs by January of 2011 — a plan big enough to meet the challenges we face that I intend to sign soon after taking office. We’ll be working out the details in the weeks ahead, but it will be a two-year, nationwide effort to jumpstart job creation in America and lay the foundation for a strong and growing economy. We’ll put people back to work rebuilding our crumbling roads and bridges, modernizing schools that are failing our children, and building wind farms and solar panels; fuel-efficient cars and the alternative energy technologies that can free us from our dependence on foreign oil and keep our economy competitive in the years ahead.

These aren’t just steps to pull ourselves out of this immediate crisis; these are the long-term investments in our economic future that have been ignored for far too long. And they represent an early down payment on the type of reform my administration will bring to Washington — a government that spends wisely, focuses on what works, and puts the public interest ahead of the same special interests that have come to dominate our politics.

I know that passing this plan won’t be easy. I will need and seek support from Republicans and Democrats, and I’ll be welcome to ideas and suggestions from both sides of the aisle.

But what is not negotiable is the need for immediate action. Right now, there are millions of mothers and fathers who are lying awake at night wondering if next week’s paycheck will cover next month’s bills. There are Americans showing up to work in the morning only to have cleared out their desks by the afternoon. Retirees are watching their life savings disappear and students are seeing their college dreams deferred. These Americans need help, and they need it now.

The survival of the American Dream for over two centuries is not only a testament to its enduring power, but to the great effort, sacrifice, and courage of the American people. It has thrived because in our darkest hours, we have risen above the smallness of our divisions to forge a path towards a new and brighter day. We have acted boldly, bravely, and above all, together. That is the chance our new beginning now offers us, and that is the challenge we must rise to in the days to come. It is time to act. As the next president of the United States, I will. Thank you.

"Geez, DLS, give the guy a break!"

For the record, I was being hard on Joe Gandelman here, not hard on Obama.

I'm skeptical of the 2.5 million jobs claim, and "alternative energy" work by the feds lies properly in the realm mainly of R&D, not producing things as a substitute for private industry, but many were clamoring that Obama needs to say or do _something_ (not because Bush is being a President Buchanan so much, or a Hoover -- saying and doing little or nothing while crisis materializes, that is -- but because people are expecting too much of him beginning the day of his inauguration). (Too many expect government to do too much.)


* * *

"I don't know where you get the idea that Obama is controlling the press with this"

He can easily employ radio and video addresses as information releases in place of press conferences. Just as his late arrival and fairly prompt departure from his first press conference after the election was a way of controlling press access. As with the "change" he is seeking in his administration that consists of a number of people we've seen before in Washington, so with his press-related behavior, I would not be and others shouldn't be surprised if he controls the press as strictly or more so than the Bush people did in earlier years (as opposed to simply avoiiding them and having Bush ape President Buchanan to finish his time in office currently, with one or two things that are done to keep things from getting much worse, such as the extension of unemployment benefits), or as the Clintons may have done when things may have changed from adoration to adversity at times during impeachment or corruption Clinton scandals. Radio and video statements are releases, and one-way communications. Combine that with access control and you have press control. (Not exclusive or fateful "control" of _content_, in other words, but in how Obama himself will interact with the press.)

"I-35 bridge"

We've had other collapses, I realize. (When I was in Atlanta I drove a number of times over the new Sunshine Skyway Bridge. It's famous in its own right for being our first big cable-stayed bridge but it replaces the old one that collapsed with tragic results.)


http://corrosion-doctors.org/Bridges/Silver-Bri...

http://www.freewebs.com/silverbridgeaccident/th...


http://www.geocities.com/pagesbydave/SunSkyDemo...

http://www.francesfarmersrevenge.com/stuff/brid...

Here, Stockster. Enough said by me here.

http://www.bts.gov/programs/geographic_informat...

DLS, that's a great resource (the structurally deficient bridges), thanks! But that information is only as good as the resources needed to actually inspect the bridges (and other infrastructure). Look at MN, District 3, where the collapse of the I-35 bridge occurred. According to this there are structurally deficient bridges in the entire Twin Cities area.... I wonder if they've all been repaired, or if the budget prevents timely and comprehensive inspections...

This is the National Highway System and doesn't include other, state and local bridges.

Thanks again for the resource!

DLS said:

"For the record, I was being hard on Joe Gandelman here, not hard on Obama."

OK, fair enough.

To your point, Obama supporters need to be careful not to become part of a personality cult. Even if you like Obama, you should ALWAYS view politicians with a skeptical eye until they actually pull through.

Bush was not the Second Coming though many conservatives thought he was. Obama is not the Second Coming though many liberals see him as such. View everything with honesty sprinkled with skepticism, and don't get caught up in jingoism (the greatest threat to free thought every created).