Airplanes!

« The CBO Doomsday Projections | Main | Verbal Masturbation »

March 24, 2009

Teleprompter vs. No Teleprompter

Letterman last night:

This attack began with Michelle Malkin who, ironically enough, supported both President Peeance-Freeance and Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin! A candidate whose only public speaking success was due in large part to a teleprompter. Elsewhere, she bombed horribly.

But again, this attack from Malkin and the others, this is speaking in tongues. It's loud noises. It doesn't make any intellectual sense whatsoever. Here we have arguably the best public speaker in our lifetime -- a president who authored or co-authored many of his most memorable speeches. A president who can speak extemporaneously about any number of subjects in a thoughtful and informed way. A president who is a constitutional scholar and one of the top three most intelligent presidents in modern history.

I mean, even if we weren't just recently finished with the George W. Peeance-Freeance presidency, the argument would still be absurd.

Adding... Congratulations to Dave and Mrs. Letterman!


Filed under: Intellectual Violence || Letterman || Loud Noises || Michelle Malkin || Position Flexible

Digg This Post  Reddit This  Share on Facebook  Add to del.icio.us  Add to Stumble Upon

Posted By Bob Cesca | March 24, 2009 2:39 PM

Comments

Sarah Palin = FAIL!

Posted by: KidDynamo0 at March 24, 2009 3:10 PM

LOL...oh...I almost miss those days of sheer laughter...until I realize how truly sad they were...

Posted by: Tim at March 24, 2009 3:14 PM

I had, then, because for posting it is necessary for the reading to be, and the writing to aim to try to ensure that, no matter what the end result might be seen as possibly coming, it is the means by which that end is achieved that the writing of the post suffices and qualitatively hirsute can then be said to have committed to the concept of making what, for many readers, is sensical.

Posted by: cousinavi at March 24, 2009 3:35 PM

off topic, but....

bob, i see you have played around with the background a little. CO-bring back the blue-UGH! hehe...

Posted by: gypsy at March 24, 2009 3:52 PM

I'm going to start sending Bob tea bags if he doesn't give us the blue GDAB again.

Posted by: Kyle at March 24, 2009 4:02 PM

Blue it is!

Posted by: Bob Cesca at March 24, 2009 4:25 PM

I do like the blue better, but since I've been coming to this blog (for approx a year) the background has been red.

Posted by: thruwithbuzz at March 24, 2009 4:27 PM

Bob, you must understand that the Republidiots believe themselves clever. This teleprompter business is their latest salvo in their attempts to undermine President Obama's credibility.

The logic that goes into this is absolutely skewed, but what they mean to do is present our president as a mere figurehead for a "radical" agenda. It's just another way for them to absolve themselves blindly supporting a charlatan for eight years prior to Obama coming into office.

As most of us know, George W. Bush was an incompetent that had no business being president. If some of you weren't aware (doubtful), the GOP played with Bush's image more than a few times. It was very, very subtle, but when you look back on his run, you can see the image tweaks here and there. The problem was Bush wasn't suited to being a merely preening like Bill Clinton, so he always stood out as an uncouth ignoramus that hid very well behind Republicon image consultants.

This whole "teleprompter" business, as well as the more recent "overexposure" meme are both apart their attempts at a surgical strike at President Obama's public persona. What the morons don't understand is that with each and every criticism they aim at our president, they allow themselves to be viewed as the overwrought losers most of us perceive them to be. They still think that they can get away with the con game they pulled. They need to think again.

Posted by: Lexaburn at March 24, 2009 4:59 PM

Sort of OT, but anyone remember when that other rising star in the GOP mocked "something called volcano monitoring"?

Ummm.

http://www.adn.com/volcano/story/733152.html

Posted by: D. C. at March 24, 2009 5:08 PM

The Slumdog Exorcist has no time for volcanoes when there are so many demons to slay........

Posted by: Curly Lasagna at March 24, 2009 5:16 PM

whoa! who's the man? bob's the man! high five and hells yeah on the blue! it's not the heavenly hue displayed on inauguration day, but maybe my color spectrum had tinted awesome from my obama high. now watch everyone hate it...(giggles)

Posted by: gypsy at March 24, 2009 5:27 PM

It's pure psychological projection. The wingnuts are so lacking in imagination that they must recycle everything we said about Bush for eight years.

Posted by: Matt Osborne at March 24, 2009 6:37 PM

I think you're on to something with that, Matt. But I don't think it's pure projection. They see it like this: if they make the same complaints about Obama that we made about Bush, and if they can make them stick, then that means they get to call us all a bunch of hypocrites without any extra effort. It's a two-for-one discrediting scheme.

Posted by: Tusz at March 24, 2009 8:38 PM

D.C. Sort of OT, but anyone remember when that other rising star in the GOP mocked "something called volcano monitoring"? I wonder how that GOP rising star like eating crow?

Posted by: Betty Losey at March 24, 2009 8:57 PM

Jindal versus the volcano

"As early as February 6, indeed, residents of cities near Mt. Redoubt were preparing for a volcano eruption because of information gleaned from early monitoring systems. As reported by USA Today, taxicab drivers were replacing air filters more frequently and local citizens began purchasing dust masks and preparing to be stuck inside their homes for lengthy periods of time."

Of course, being a republican douchebag, Jindal will just pretend he didn't make an ass out of himself.

Hey, what happened that troll who sarcastically asked me if they "shoved a thermometer up [the volcano's] ass"?

Posted by: D. C. at March 24, 2009 11:50 PM

Good god!

Posted by: Elizabeth at March 25, 2009 1:36 AM

They see it like this: if they make the same complaints about Obama that we made about Bush, and if they can make them stick, then that means they get to call us all a bunch of hypocrites without any extra effort.

Of course that's their interpretation of hypocrisy, which is itself hypocritical -- if you've spent 8 years holding your guy blameless and tossing ad hominem attacks at his critics, it's utterly hypocritical to then turn around and criticize the other guy for what you've defended your guy against -- even if it were true of the other guy. And their ultimate defense of anything they do is "You would have done it too!" -- which compounds a tu quoque fallacy with a fallacy of contrary-to-fact hypothesis.

Posted by: Jay Ballou at March 26, 2009 4:18 PM



pixel.jpg
rogue_blogging_logo.jpg

Buy my book!