I remember when we discussed the campaigns before the 2008 presidential elections. Someone - maybe Ernie - asked me what I thought about Obama and I said "I think he's an empty suit" and something along the lines of thinking that Obama would become "the most divisive president since Abraham Lincoln."
I think I was right. Anyone care to disagree? How have your impression of Obama changed since those early days? I have to say I thought it would be bad but I think Mr. Obama have exceeded my expectations for the worst. // Lennart Sent from my phone. > On Nov 16, 2014, at 5:42 PM, BILROJ via Centroids: The Center of the Radical > Centrist Community <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > American Thinker > > > May 14, 2012 > The Amateur: Barack Obama in the White House > > By Ed Lasky > Edward Klein's new book on Barack Obama, The Amateur: Barack Obama in the > White House, is a withering portrayal of a radical adrift, in over his head, > drowning in his own incompetency -- while being weighed down by a small > circle of "advisers" who are compounding the problem of the Amateur in the > White House. > > Klein's book begins with a talisman-like quote uttered by Barack Obama when > his recently appointed Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner tried to boost Obama's > ego by telling him, "Your legacy is going to be preventing the second Great > Depression." To which Barack Obama responded, "That's not enough for me > > > As all of America knows by now, Obama has aggressively sought to > "fundamentally transform" America -- one of the few promises he has kept from > the days of 2008. Five trillion dollars of borrowing, ObamaCare passed over > the objections of the majority of Americans through legislative legerdemain > and special deals made with resistant politicians, failed stimulus, green > programs failing left and right as taxpayers are left holding the bag, a > recovery that is the most anemic on record, an America that has been sundered > by the man who promises to unite us, America weaker abroad and at home -- > yes, America has been fundamentally transformed. Mission Accomplished. > But how and why did Obama succeed in such a catastrophic way? That is the > question that Klein successfully answers in his extremely readable and > enjoyable book, with enough spicy details to satisfy the craving of anyone > interested in how President Obama and those closest to him have driven us to > the condition we find ourselves in as we approach November. > > One of the motifs that runs throughout the book is Barack Obama's sheer level > of incompetency. He has the fatal conceit of many politicians: an > overweening ego. That may be a prerequisite for politicians and leaders, but > when it is unleavened by a willingness to consider the views of others, it > becomes a fatal conceit. And Obama has that trait in abundance. > > Stories tumble out that reveal a man who believes he is all but omniscient -- > unwilling to give any credence to the views of others (especially but not > limited to those across the aisle). Experts in management are interviewed > who point out that he lacks essential qualities of leadership. Indeed, the > book gets its title from an outburst from Bill Clinton, who was trying to > encourage Hillary to take on Obama in the Democratic primary of 2012: > > Obama doesn't know how to be president. He doesn't know how the world works. > He's incompetent. He's...he's...Barack Obama's an amateur. > > But Klein does not rest there. He delves into associates from Obama's career > in Cook County politics, his stint as a state senator, and his rise to the > United States Senate. There is a common pattern: Obama likes to campaign, > but once he is elected and actually starts working, his interest flags, and > he starts looking for the next "big thing" -- electorally speaking. He had > few if any accomplishments or professional standing in any of his previous > positions. Even when he served as a lecturer at the University of Chicago > Law School, he avoided any encounters with other faculty who enjoyed > discussing the law. His reluctance to engage them is revealing in and of > itself, suggesting he had a reason for his lack of confidence. > > His disdain toward working with others is manifest. He has gained a > reputation over the last few years as being cold and distant, refusing to > engage, as have other presidents, in the give-and-take of politics, in the > social niceties that help grease the wheels in Washington. Liberal > Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen recently advised him to read Robert > Caro's newest volume on the life of Lyndon Johnson as a primer on how to be > president. Johnson, of course, was a master at pulling levers of power, but > he also knew how to persuade individual politicians on both sides of the > aisle to work with him on legislation. But, of course, LBJ also had the > common touch and, having risen from humble beginnings, never considered it > beneath him to work with those underneath him. Not so Barack Obama. He > complained to foreign leaders that he had to waste time talking with > "congressmen from Palookaville." At another time, he switched locales and > said he was tired of dealing with people from "Podunk." > > His campaign trail comments regarding small-town America as being populated > by "bitter" people who cling to guns and Bibles was not a one-off. They are > reflective of his views. > > But the high and the mighty also come in for the Obama treatment. Klein > reveals dismay among former Obama supporters who feel they have been > mistreated, maligned, and thrown under the bus. Obama's most generous early > donors have been all but ignored; early mentors in the black business > community have been sidelined if not completely ditched; people don't hear > from him or his staff unless a fundraiser is coming up. But there is more: > Caroline Kennedy is angry at the way she and her family were used for > campaign purposes in 2008 and then summarily dismissed and stored away like > so many movie props have been (the latter is my description). > > Even Oprah Winfrey has been stiff-armed by the Obamas. According to the > book, Oprah took a big risk in supporting Obama in 2008 and campaigning for > Obama in Iowa, being a big boost in his campaign. The ratings for her show > weakened significantly (and her new network has been a huge disappointment). > But when she has tried to visit the White House, she has been all but treated > as persona non grata. Apparently, Michelle Obama is a possessive person who > fears the influence Oprah may have over Barack Obama (more on this below). > Oprah blames it on Michelle's anti-obesity campaign. She is quoted as > saying, "Michelle hates fat people and doesn't want me waddling around the > White House." Klein digs up a quotation of Michelle Obama's from a White > House source that seems to confirm Oprah's suspicion: > > Oprah only wants to cash in using the White House as a backdrop for her show > to perk up ratings. Oprah with her yo-yo dieting and huge girth, is a > terrible role model. Kids will look at Oprah, who's rich and famous and > huge, and figure it's okay to be fat. > > Oprah, Caroline Kennedy, Pastor Jeremiah Wright (who merits a chapter), and > Obama's former long-time doctor (who feels Obama is distant and lacks > feeling, passion, and humanity) all join a long list of people whom the > Obamas have used, abused, and then cast aside once they moved into the White > House. > > A few have survived the winnowing process, of course. There is Michelle, who > might be described as the living and real-life descendant of Lady Macbeth. > The book provides some history of the early days between Barack and Michelle: > marked by some tempests, yet also marked by Michelle's overwhelming push for > Barack to win power and wealth. Insiders are reluctant to tangle with the > First Lady, and with good reason. Michelle, like her husband, has a > proclivity to blame others for her husband's failures. Former Press > Secretary Robert Gibbs felt her sting when it was revealed that Michelle had > complained about life in the White House to the then-first lady of France, > Carla Bruni-Sarkozy. Gibbs acted to control the damage by arranging for the > Élysée Palace to issue a denial. > > But the response did not come quickly enough for Michelle, and she arranged > for Valerie Jarrett -- close to the Obamas for years, and who has an > omnipresence in the White House that makes the unelected and unconfirmed czar > issue seem trivial -- to deliver a stern rebuke to Gibbs, who > counter-attacked. Anyone heard from Robert Gibbs lately? > > The role of Valerie Jarrett has prompted much speculation. As Edward Klein > notes, she has a mouthful of a title -- senior adviser and assistant to the > president for intergovernmental affairs and public engagement -- that > "doesn't begin to do justice to her unrivaled status in the White House." > Valerie Jarrett apparently has a role in most major decisions: she often > appears in meetings the president has with major political leaders from > Capitol Hill and with foreign leaders as well. She often stays behind to > have private discussions with the president. Obama admitted that he ran > every decision by her. > > That is worrying since, as Klein notes, Jarrett's own career is not one that > would prepare her to assume such a prominent role. Hers is no rags-to-riches > story that would give her the "chops" to have such a Svengali-like influence > over the president of the United States. She was blessed with a wonderful > set of advantages -- descended from a highly regarded political family in > Chicago. > > Jarrett was a force to be reckoned with in the Daley administration and then > capitalized on her political connections to land a job heading up a real > estate company in Chicago where she oversaw, among other developments, > properties that under her company's management degenerated into slums. > Business leaders are aghast that she has such a powerful role in the White > House. A donor is quoted as saying that not only is Valerie Jarrett a > liability, but others in the White House concur with his views. Jarrett has > butted heads with Rahm Emanuel, who felt that it was wrong to focus on > passing ObamaCare when the economy and jobs should have been higher > priorities. > Who won that match? Rahm returned to Chicago and became mayor in 2009. > > The roles of Michelle Obama and Valerie Jarrett cannot be overstated. They > are symptomatic of a larger problem in the White House decision-making > process (one that I noted in "How Obama Makes Decisions"). > > Barack Obama, to a greater extent than any modern president, refuses to > listen to the views of others or consult with experts and advisers outside > his own tight and constricted circle from Cook County. There are many > revelations of his faulty decision making uncovered by Klein. Indeed, one of > Jarrett's roles is to shield Obama from dealing with people who don't agree > with him or who may say something that deflates his ego > > When Bill Daley (the chief of staff) realized that the contraception and > abortifacient mandates of ObamaCare might offend Catholics, he arranged a > meeting without Jarrett's knowledge between Obama and New York > then-Archbishop Timothy Dolan to deal with an issue that would offend many as > violating the principle of religious freedom (as well as Catholic beliefs). > Jarrett went to the president and vented her anger. > > Anyone seen Bill Daley lately? > > On issue after issue, President Obama remains his insular self, refusing to > seek counsel or input from others with more experience. > > Critics believe he has made a mess of foreign policy precisely because not > only does he have a dearth of experience in this area, but because, under our > system, foreign policy is one of the few areas where a president enjoys > almost unlimited power. Thus, he is free to formulate his own agenda > regardless of the views of others and the damage these policies cause. > > When pro-Israel Americans met with Obama to discuss his actions toward Israel > (that many, including myself, view as being counterproductive) he dismissed > the ideas of Abe Foxman, head of the Anti-Defamation League, with the > statement "you are absolutely wrong." The president, who has no compunction > telling people that they are not only wrong, but "absolutely wrong" in > public, needs to start feeling some of the empathy he accuses Republicans of > lacking. > > According to veteran journalist Richard Chesnoff, quoted in the book, > "Obama's problem in dealing with the Arab-Israeli conundrum" comes "from his > one-man style and his inflated view of his own leadership talents[.] ... > [P]erhaps, even more egregiously, he seems to have an exaggerated sense of > his own depth of understanding of the Middle East, which is simply not borne > out by his background or experience." There may be more to it than that to > explain the pressure he has put on our one true ally in the Middle East, > Israel. American Thinker published numerous articles in 2008 covering not > only Pastor Jeremiah Wright, Junior's views of Israel as an apartheid state, > but Obama's associations with anti-Israel Palestinians in Chicago, his own > suspect language regarding Israel, and his close relationship with Samantha > Power (now playing a key role on his National Security Council), who not only > has a long anti-Israel history but also made an anti-Semitic remark that was > smothered by the media in 2008. There were good reasons for the Los Angeles > Times to run a column during the campaign that "Allies of Palestinians see a > friend in Obama." > > Readers will thoroughly enjoy Klein's book on Obama. There are substantive > issues raised about Obama's leadership abilities that are enhanced with > interesting digressions regarding life inside ObamaWorld and how those > dynamics effect decisions made from the Oval Office. > > Klein concludes the book with doubt that Obama could ever change his approach > toward governing and suspicion that his agenda is to impose a vast > redistribution scheme upon America that has worked so well in the decaying > and disintegrating European Union. He wonders if Republicans are up to the > task of pointing out to the public the truth about Obama's agenda, given the > overwhelming media bias in favor of Barack Obama. > > Klein's book could serve as a roadmap for Republicans. > > > > BR Note : Mitt Romney was too stupid to do any such thing. > > > > ================================================ > > > > > > > OpEdNews Op Eds 8/7/2012 at 06:22:09 > Review of Edward Klein's Book "The Amateur" > By Herbert Calhoun > > The book begins with an analysis of Barack Hussein Obama (BHO) made by Bill > Clinton in a private rump session held at the Clinton home, in which Bill > (with Chelsea's support), was trying to urge Hillary to break ranks with BHO > and run against him in 2012. Bill's analysis, as usual was as cold-blooded as > it was sound: He argued (rather convincingly in my view) that although BHO > was smart, and could made great speeches, he was not a communicator. He and > his staff spoke and acted in sound bites. And had flubbed their own policies > without even trying. They know how to run a good campaign but do not know how > to engage in retail politics, or how to govern. In short, BHO is incompetent; > in over his head; a rank amateur. On the other hand, as Bill ended his > soliloquy, Hillary he said is seen as tough, experienced and tested. Now was > her time to go for the brass ring. After Hillary rolled her eyes in disgust > and asked him about loyalty, Bill answered by saying that loyalty in politics > is a joke. There is no word for it in the rulebook. Plus, where was BHO's > sense of loyalty? Although other presidents (including Republican ones) had > called on him for advice, BHO had ignored him. The guy simply does not know > how to be president. He does not know how the world works. He is an amateur. > > Bill Clinton's short soliloquy urging Hillary to run against Obama, is how > the book got its title and is perhaps the best possible summary of the book, > for it gets to the core of what the book is about: What exactly is lacking in > the Obama administration? > > Using Bill's soliloquy as a launch point, we see through the author's eyes > that what is missing is a sense of how to govern, a lack of passion and a > lack personal interest and of action or ownership of his own policies, the > feeling that the man in the clock tower is a cypher, a ghost, a dispassionate > technocrat, that he is not really there and that if he is, he is lacking a > normal humanity. And while it is clear to everyone that BHO is a good > campaigner, a great speaker, a shrewd triangulator, and among the best > Machiavellian operators we have seen in recent years, he is not a leader. He > lacks a clearly defined character. > > Thus from this platform, the author goes in search of the answer as to why > Mr. Obama is not a leader. He begins to decode the Obama enigma by trying to > fill in the blanks. He scrounges into BHO's past, touching all of the > familiar signposts in BHO's history -- from his defeat by Bobby Rush for the > Illinois Senate race, to the spiritual tutoring by the Reverend Jeremiah > Wright, to honing his speaking abilities at operation PUSH by the Reverend > Jessie Jackson, to his eventual ascent to the U.S. Senate and then on to the > Presidency. But as important as these events and these two men were in > helping to shape the Obama identity, the key that eventually unlocked the BHO > mystery lay at the foot of another Chicagoan: Valerie Jarrett, the Obamas' > Consigliore, their Svengali and their self-appointed gatekeeper into the > minds and hearts of Obamadom, and into the U.S. Presidency under the Obamas. > > Klein makes a strong case that Ms. Jarrett, a holdover from the Daly machine > days, and affectionately known in White house circles as "VJ", is the key to > understanding most of the dysfunction that has become the Obama > administration. VJ has used her power of the ability to deny access to the > President jealously, sometimes mean-spiritedly and often capriciously. Due to > her lack of political training and inexperience, VJ has no clear sense of the > lay of the political landscape that the president has to deal with, and thus > of what is needed to protect the president from outsiders as well as from > himself. The author concludes that with VJ and Michelle leading the pack as > BHO's primary palace guards, those whom he himself says he trusts implicitly, > the Obama white house has truly become a case of the blind leading the blind. > > > The U.S. presidency has been channeled down, and imprisoned in, a narrow > alley carved out by inexperience and sycophancy; and as a result, its vital > blood supply has been cutoff from serious critiques, from fresh ideas and > from the outside world generally. As a result, BHO hears only what Michelle > and VJ want him to hear. They both also weight in heavily on his decisions, > his appointments, who he sees, and where he travels. In short the U.S. > presidency, the leader of the Western World, is being overseen and tended by > a couple of inexperienced "mother hens." The leadership vacuum we see at the > center of the oval office begins with Obama's failure to break away from > these two mother hens that have turned the presidency into their own private > preserve. > > And although there have been a few triumphs in the Obama administration under > this arrangement, on balance the result has been unnecessary dysfunction, > inconsistent policy formulation, a failure to engage Congress or lead the > Democratic Party, untimely and unnecessary turnovers in key positions, a > failure to learn from experience, disloyalty and gratuitous political > insults and slights to contributors and backers in the democratic political > base. This includes supporters as close as Oprah Winfry, Caroline Kennedy, > the Reverend Jessie Jackson, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Jewish donors, > Black leaders, and the whole left end of the political spectrum. All in all, > it all adds up to a dismal failure in presidential leadership. > > The only complaint I had with an otherwise, first-class analysis and > well-written presentation was the inconsistent attempt by the author to > gratuitously and repeatedly tag BHO with the label of being a left-wing > radical (a left-leaning ideological wolf in sheep clothing as he put it). In > trying so desperately to tag BHO with this label, the author obviously has > missed BHO's main stratagem: to fake out his base with left-leaning rhetoric, > while at the same time moving decidedly and decisively to the right of center > on most of his policies! > > May I suggest that the author presented not a scintilla of evidence to back > up his insinuations that BHO is a freewheeling, leftwing ideologue. Quite the > contrary in fact, there is much presented here that is overlooked by the > author suggesting that BHO is not much of a left-winger at all, but if > anything is an avowed right-of-center politician. Foremost among the pieces > of evidence presented in this book is the author's own characterization of > BHO's economic policies as being "State Capitalism," and the fact that BHO's > policies in almost every respect, fall just short of being identical to those > of his predecessor, the radical right-winger, GW Bush. > > Despite this habit of occasionally (and disingenuously in my view) tossing a > few chunks of red meat to his right wing readers, Ed Klein may have penned > the best and most serious critique of the Obama administration yet. His > conclusion is the same as that of Bill Clinton's: that while BHO is smart in > the policy wonk sense, he is temperamentally unsuited to be president; that > although Mr. Obama can make a fine speech and is a better then average > University teacher, he is no communicator, and is inept in the fine art of > retail politics, management and governance. > > It should be noted that in this context, the author offers this assessment of > BHO by comparing Mr. Obama with at least two past presidents, JFK, and > Woodrow Wilson, who in similar circumstances learned, improved and were > successful for the rest of their respective terms. But the author's analysis > is also based on more than 200 interviews of those close to Mr. Obama, on > the author's own assessments of BHO's management style and the results of > what the author sees as his failed policies. Of the twelve or so books I have > read and reviewed on Mr. Obama, this one gets closer to the truth of Mr. > Obama than any of the others. Five stars. > > > > > ================================================== > > > Accuracy in Media > > Obama, The Amateur—Interview with Edward Klein (Double-issue) > > > > Roger Aronoff — June 21, 2012 > > Edward Klein’s new book, The Amateur: Barack Obama in the White House, is a > devastating portrait of America’s 44th president. The book is based on more > than 200 interviews, many of them on the record. The title comes from remarks > made by former President Bill Clinton back in August of 2011 at his home in > Chappaqua, New York. Klein describes an ongoing conversation that went on for > “days, if not for weeks,” in which Bill was pushing hard to convince Hillary > Clinton to leave her post as Secretary of State to run against Obama in 2012. > The conversation was in front of several close friends, at least one of whom > obviously spoke to Klein. “The economy’s a mess, it’s dead flat,” Clinton > told Hillary. “They don’t know what they’re doing. They govern in sound > bites.” > > Hillary brought up the issue of loyalty. Bill replied that “loyalty doesn’t > exist in politics.” He said he has no relationship with the President > whatsoever. “Obama doesn’t know how to be president. He doesn’t know how the > world works. He’s incompetent.” Finally, Clinton stated, “Barack Obama is an > amateur.” > > While this has been denied by Clinton staffers, Klein defines this amateurism > as “a president who is inept in the arts of management and governance, who > doesn’t learn from his mistakes, and who therefore repeats policies that make > our economy less robust and our nation less safe. We discover a man who > blames all his problems on those with whom he disagrees (‘Washington,’ > ‘Republicans,’ ‘the media’), who discards old friends and supporters when > they are no longer useful (Democrats, African-Americans, Jews), and who is so > thin skinned that he constantly complains about what people say and write > about him. We come to know a strange kind of politician, one who derives no > joy from the cut and thrust of politics, but who clings to the narcissistic > life of the presidency.” > > Klein says that “this portrait of Obama is radically at odds with the image > of a centrist, pragmatic, post-partisan leader that his political handlers > have tried to create. And it is a far cry from the Obama most Americans > remember from four years ago.” > > “How did he turn out to be the most divisive president in recent American > history?” asks Klein. It is that question that is at the heart of this book. > > Some of Obama’s critics don’t accept the notion that he is an amateur. > Instead, they see him as clever and manipulative, a left-wing ideologue who > knows exactly what he is doing. Klein certainly doesn’t dismiss that idea. > “Based on my reporting,” writes Klein, “I concluded that Obama is actually in > revolt against the values of the society he was elected to lead. Which is why > he has refused to embrace American exceptionalism—the idea that Americans are > a special people with a special destiny—and why he has railed at the > capitalist system, demonized the wealthy, and embraced the Occupy Wall Street > movement.” > > Klein sees what he considers both aspects of Obama’s character: “Not only is > Barack Obama an amateur, unable to function in the job of the Presidency,” he > told Accuracy in Media, “but he is, at the same time, a creature of Chicago > politics, and a very radical left-wing member of the Democratic Party who > wants to use his time in office to engineer a transformation of our society, > and make us a much more socialistic country. This is the toxic mix of > incompetence and radicalism, and we’ve seen the results in many ways, most > dramatically, perhaps, in the terrible economic fix that we find ourselves in > today, thanks, in large part, to Obama’s boneheaded policies.” > > Edward Klein has had a long, distinguished career as a journalist and author. > He was editor-in-chief of The New York Times Magazine for more than a decade, > and was the foreign editor for Newsweek. He has written numerous historical > books, many of which have been bestsellers, including The Amateur, which at > this writing has been number one on The New York Times bestseller list for > four straight weeks. In an exclusive interview with Accuracy in Media, we > discussed Klein’s politics, his years at The New York Times, and his research > about President Obama. > > What has received the most attention from Klein’s latest book is his > interview with the controversial Reverend Jeremiah Wright, who was the pastor > of the church in Chicago that Obama attended for more than 20 years. Wright > told Klein of an offer of money from the Obama camp in return for his silence > during the 2008 campaign. Wright has changed his opinion of Obama, rather > significantly, and was very willing to talk about it, knowing the tape > recorder was rolling. > > We also talked about Obama’s record on national security issues, and his > relationship with the government of Israel and the Jewish community. Whatever > one thinks of Obama, they will gain new insights upon reading this book. > Klein has done an excellent job of reporting. Not surprisingly, The New York > Times and Washington Post have both written about the book in unflattering > terms, questioning the veracity of some of Klein’s reporting. The Post quotes > a Hillary Clinton aide as calling Klein “a congenital liar.” The article says > that Klein is reviled by the left and has not yet been embraced by the right. > You can read excerpts from the interview below, or you can go online and > read or listen to the complete interview here. > > KLEIN: The New York Times, when I was there—which was almost 25 years ago > now—was under the editorship of the late A.M. Rosenthal, and my editorship of > the magazine, a—what I would call a “straight newspaper.” In other words, it > was neither liberal nor conservative. It tried to be balanced and fair, and I > think Abe Rosenthal did a fantastic job keeping it that way. Unfortunately, > when he left, and others took over, the entire paper, including the > magazine—which I left in 1987, 1988—started drifting to the Left, and now, of > course, it’s all the way over to the Left. So my association with the > magazine doesn’t, ipso facto, mean that I was some sort of a wild-eyed > liberal while I was there. > > KLEIN: I looked at [Obama], I said to myself, “Here is this African-American > senator who comes out of nowhere, has accomplished nothing during his time in > public life, who hypnotizes millions of Americans into voting for him, gets > into the White House, and turns into something that we have never seen in the > modern day, which is an amateur in the White House—someone who does not know > how to do the actual day-to-day job of the Presidency. I thought that was not > only a very good story, but also a very important story, because we need to > avoid electing people like Barack Obama in the future. In order to do so, we > need to see what the consequences of having elected not only an inexperienced > guy—he was certainly inexperienced—but a guy who did not have the temperament > to do the job—and, as we’ve seen, he hasn’t been able to do the job. > > KLEIN: I think the most important indicator that I got was from both the > Democratic and Republican sides in the Congress when I did a lot of reporting > in Washington for this book, The Amateur, and discovered that it wasn’t only > the Republicans who found it difficult to the point of impossible to work > with him because there was no give on Obama’s side, but the Democrats > themselves had no respect for this President. They didn’t think he had the > executive leadership ability and skills that are required in a President. For > instance, again and again people pointed out that Lyndon Johnson, who > couldn’t give really a decent speech, or read well from the teleprompter, > knew how to operate the levers of power in Washington, whereas Obama, who’s > good on the podium in front of a teleprompter, who looks good with his > neckties and so forth, hasn’t the first clue that politics requires the > president to have personal relations with his colleagues in the equal branch > of government, which is the Congress. In order to do that, he has to reach > out and create these relationships. Barack Obama has been totally incapable > of doing so. > > KLEIN: I did tape-record this conversation with the Reverend Wright’s > approval…The tape recorder sat on the table between us. He approved that. I > think he understood, very clearly, that this was his opportunity to tell his > side of the story, and get back at Barack Obama. I think he understood > exactly what he was doing. On the one hand, he was trying to clear his name > by claiming that he had been taken out of context, and he really didn’t mean > the things that people had heard him say—which I found unconvincing, I must > say. But, on the other hand, he also wanted to use the opportunity—and did > so—to indicate that Barack Obama was no better than any other politician, > and, in some ways, worse, because Obama didn’t even stop at using his best > friends to offer Jeremiah Wright money to remain silent during the 2008 > campaign. > > KLEIN: I said, to the Reverend Wright—it’s on the tape, and by the way, I > released the entire three hours, not just the edited snippets, but the whole > thing, so it’s out in public for anyone to listen to—“Did you convert Barack > Obama from Islam to Christianity?” I asked that question to the pastor who > ministered to Obama for over 23 years, and his answer was, quote, “That’s > hard to say.” Now, that’s quite a statement. > > KLEIN: Once Obama became a national politician, he became like everybody > else. Up until that point, Wright thought that Obama was a special > politician…But he said he changed his mind about Obama after Obama became a > national politician and started to behave just like every other politician. > > ARONOFF: You write about how Brian Ross of ABC News broke what you called the > “media’s gentlemen’s agreement” not to air the Jeremiah Wright videos during > the 2008 campaign. Ross talked about how it aired on Good Morning America, > but they wouldn’t put it on the evening news, and people at the network were > quite annoyed with him. How does a “gentlemen’s agreement” like that occur? > Is it spoken? Unspoken? How high up? What are we talking about here? > > KLEIN: Roger, that’s a wonderful question. I wish I knew the answer. I’ve > been asked that question in various forms ever since The Amateur was > published, because everyone figures I would know the answer, since I was > there at Newsweek, there at The New York Times, there at Vanity Fair, and all > those publications, of course, are part of the mainstream media. These things > are often done in informal wink-and-nod kinds of ways. It’s rare that > somebody would come out and say, “Let’s not run Brian Ross’s videos of the > Reverend Wright ranting and raving against America, against whites, against > Jews, and against Israel, because we don’t want to embarrass Barack Obama. I > can’t imagine any producer saying that. But I can imagine a producer saying, > “These tapes are incendiary and one-sided, they’re unfair”—coming up with > some lame excuse for not putting them on the evening show which everyone in > the room would understand: Instead of his saying out and out, “We’re in the > tank for Obama”—which they all are—he’s using code words. I think that > happens most of the time. People in the mainstream media see a lot of each > other at lunches, cocktail parties, dinners. They go on vacations in the same > places, the Hamptons or Martha’s Vineyard. They have an opportunity to talk > to each other, e-mail each other, and, you know, they make comments, snide > comments about Republicans. I can’t tell you how often in recent days I’ve > heard Democrats say to me that Mitt Romney is an idiot. Now, here’s a guy > who went to Harvard Law School, Harvard Business School, top of his class, > brilliant businessman, a successful governor—they said the same thing about > Ronald Reagan, by the way, back in the 1970s and ’80s—all of which is typical > of the kind of conversation that goes on among these people. It has its > effect because if you want to remain part of the club, and don’t want to be > shunned and excommunicated, then you go along with it. > > KLEIN: Yet everyone in this group thinks they’re doing the right thing > because they’re on the side of the poor and the oppressed, and they’re doing > charitable work on behalf of people who need help. They think of themselves > as very enlightened, whereas, in fact, they’re not doing their job—and their > job is a very simple job, which is to tell the truth on all sides, and not > pull any punches. > > KLEIN: Other than the very snarky Janet Maslin review in The New York Times > of my book, The Amateur, which was really not a review of the book at all, > but an attack on me personally—there are all kinds of adjectives to describe > me, such as “arrogant,” and things like that, “ideologue,” “invective,” what > have you—the mainstream media has not largely, but entirely, ignored and > avoided writing about this book, which has become quite a phenomenon. It has > shot up to the number one spot on the Times’ list three weeks in a row, and > it has done so without getting any attention at the morning shows on ABC, > NBC, or CBS; the evening shows; any of the talk shows, such as The View or > Live! with Kelly; or any of these places—but it has received a warm reception > at Fox News Network, thanks to Roger Ailes, I must say. I’ve been on Hannity > twice, on Fox and Friends, on Lou Dobbs. My friend Larry Kudlow over on CNBC > has had me once but that’s an unusual break with the phalanx that’s been > against me. But, you know, radio—thank God for radio in this country, because > radio shows—I’ve done probably a hundred or more radio shows. > > KLEIN: So people sometimes snigger when one talks about the mainstream media, > as though, “Oh, come on, there is no, there’s no conspiracy among the > mainstream media.” Well, there is! It’s as simple as that. I’ve experienced > it. Other people have experienced it. Accuracy in Media, of course, has been > on that case for a long, long time—doing God’s work. And if you hadn’t been, > I mean, God knows where we would be today. So, it is possible to get out a > message without the mainstream media, but it’s a sad, sad comment on our > society that the most powerful organs of communication are in the control of > people who censor any point of view other than their left-wing point of view. > > KLEIN: The Clintons and the Obamas are the Hatfields and McCoys of the > Democratic Party. They’ve been feuding now for several years—bitter feud, > nothing but hatred on both sides. They come from two different wings of the > Democratic party—Clinton from the center-Left, Obama from the far Left. They > don’t agree on practically anything—well, they not only don’t agree but they > hold grudges about what happened during the 2008 primary campaign, when > Hillary and Obama went at each other. But as you just pointed out, Bill’s > chief goal in life is to get Hillary elected president of the United States, > and one of the main reasons he’s campaigning for Obama is to show that he’s a > loyal Democrat, in order to be able to say in 2016, “I expect to be paid back > for my loyalty by the Democratic machinery.” But Bill being Bill, he seems > not to have been able to contain himself. His real feelings have kept popping > up. And as we’ve read, even his own people, in his own camp, are appalled by > these comments of his, which have been very detrimental to Obama—and you can > imagine how the Obama people must feel, using this guy and then being abused > by him. > > ARONOFF: Now what do you make of this brochure from Obama’s literary agency > that was brought to light recently by Breitbart’s website, that for 17 years, > and through three or four changes, up through when Obama was a U.S. senator, > it said he was born in Kenya—and the person from that firm, from that agency, > said it was a “fact-checking error.” Have you looked at that? > > KLEIN: Yes, of course. As you know, and as we all know, these biographies > that are put out by literary agencies are not made out of thin air. They’re > created by the subjects themselves. The authors provide the material for > these biographies. The agencies have no way of writing the biographies > without the author sending in his biography. So clearly, you can’t believe > that this business about him being born in Kenya was a typographical error, > or some kind of error. It clearly came from Obama himself. What are we to > make of that? I, personally, make of it that he felt being perceived as a > foreign-born person would make him more exotic and appealing as a writer in > that atmosphere, and the kind of books that he was talking and thinking about > writing, and that he was leading people to the assumption that he was an > exchange student from Kenya the way his father had been. > > KLEIN: There has been tension from day one between the Obama political team, > in particular, and the military brass. There’s also been tension between some > of the policy people, but a number of these policy people are, at the same > time, political people. I mean, [Thomas] Donilon, for instance, who is now > the National Security Advisor, was part of the Obama 2008 campaign. He, in > fact, prompted Obama, and prepared him for the debates. So number one, to > answer your question, the relationship between the Obama administration and > the military is not a good one. There are a lot of nasty comments being made > on both sides. Number two, General Jones was treated with contempt by the > people around Obama. Even General Jones’s wife refers to the people around > Obama as “A bunch of Chicago thugs.” Number three, I think that it is clear > that the Obama foreign policy is run directly from Obama, not in the State > Department, and not even from his experts… > > KLEIN: Samantha Powers is a former Harvard professor who believes, and has > written, that the United States is responsible for a lot of bad things in the > world, and that we should go and apologize to the rest of the world. She has > said so. She thinks that Willy Brandt getting down on his knees in front of > the Holocaust Museum, or whatever, in Germany was the way the President > should behave—and we’ve seen the President doing just that. She is in the > National Security Council; she is one of his chief political advisors—very, > very far left, and very anti-Israeli. Until his Israel policy blew up in his > face, and he had to back off, Obama was following in Samantha Powers’ > footsteps. > > KLEIN: Dr. David Scheiner, who is an unreconstructed old Lefty and doesn’t > make any bones about it, sat down with me and told me that, number one, he > thinks that Obamacare is an abomination and isn’t going to work—it’s too big, > it’s too expensive, it’s too complicated—and, number two, that Obama himself, > whom he treated for over 20 years, was one of his most cold, distant > patients, whom he could never get to know because he was a person who had > very little human contact with other people. So when the inauguration came > around, Obama invited his barber to the inauguration, but didn’t invite David > Scheiner, his physician. The doctor said he was very hurt by that.• > > > > -- > -- > Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community > <[email protected]> > Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism > Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
