Gibbs, I am begging you to STFU

[Ramulux]

Re-posted from another thread about Gibbs new remarks from today, thought I had a few good points.



This dude is unbelievable. How can he not understand the immeasurable amount of harm he is doing to this administration with his amateur political ravings.

I think the main point to take away from this whole fiasco is that Gibbs and this administration are fucking terrible at understanding the political landscape.

I hate Gibbs, I never liked the guy and as others have said hes been saying shit like this for a while so hes not really the issue here.

The issue is that there are so many positive things the dems could be using to their advantage but they not only dont seem to want to do them, they dont even seem to see them.

Mike Lux was on the Young Turks the other day and he talked about how progressives and liberals always had a place at the negotiating table in the Clinton administration, he may not have always given them what they wanted but he always heard them out. He then said that Obama is not doing this at all. He surrounds himself with people who have openly shown childish disdain for liberals and basically control Obama's schedule and who he gets to meet with.

This makes me feel like Obama is not even aware of what we want and what we expect of him. This point is hammered home with Gibbs making ridiculous statements about us thinking hes Bush or wanting to get rid of the pentagon. This administration lives in the Washington echo chamber and seems incapable of communicating with anyone on the outside in a realistic manner. Rant over.

[FiveGoodMen]

1. "How can he not understand the immeasurable amount of harm he is doing to this administration?"

If the admin objected to what Gibbs said, he'd have publicly taken it back by now.

How can anyone, anywhere actually believe that Gibbs is saying these things without approval from above?

[Individualist]

2. Exactly! Think of the times Obama has immediately scolded Biden for misspeaking.

Has he done the same with Gibbs? Of course not.

[Phlem]

4. Don't forget the time Obama

threw the left under the bus on Fox news trying to get his health care bill passed.

-p

[Whisp]

30. no he hasn't, because this is No Big Fucking Deal. n/t

[Ramulux]

5. Im not saying

the administration doesnt agree with this, in fact I pretty much said the exact opposite. I'm just saying that in a political sense it is retarded and even if this administration feels this way it is politically retarded to let him keep reiterating this.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

6. psst...

Edit the "r" word. Don't want a sensible comment disappeared for word choice

[Jackpine Radical]

23. What, we can't quote Rahm now?

[northernlights]

43. yes,but in that case it's safest to accurately quote, not paraphrase

and attribute the quote. As in, apparently they think we are all "fucking retarded"*

* Rahmbo



:D ;)

[FiveGoodMen]

7. I won't argue with that.

[EFerrari]

10. He can be (likely is) speaking with approval AND still hurt the admin. n/t

[glitch]

44. He is doing harm to this election, the Administration is safe. It's Congress that is being harmed.

Repeatedly. Why?

[smokey nj]

3. What did he say today? I missed it.

[BootinUp]

8. Is there a video of this somewhere?

[Whisp]

9. you are foaming all over your keyboard, dear.

:)
give it up.
you aren't intimidating anyone, or making anyone change their minds nor are any threats taken seriously.
you are just looking silly, really.
this is a way bigger deal in your head than it is in the real world

[Ramulux]

12. What?

intimidating? What are you talking about? Explain how I am wrong and then maybe we can have a debate.

[EFerrari]

13. Did you misplace your post? There are no threats

or efforts at intimidation in the OP.

[frylock]

22. these aren't the droids you're looking for

[JVS]

11. It's not his job to STFU, it's Obama's and Rahm's job to tell him to shut up if he's making trouble.

Rahm's job because he's chief of staff.

Obama's job because ultimately the buck stops with him.

[defendandprotect]

14. Obviously, Gibbs has different interests from ours . . . which we should acknowledge!!

[TheKentuckian]

15. It is intentional and the damage is done.

[damntexdem]

16. If he won't leave the job, perhaps he could change his name:

'Gibes' would be about right. ;-)

[Divernan]

17. Reporters are never supposed to become part of a story,

let alone the central character of a series of ongoing stories; The same holds true for PR flacks, which is Gibbs' role.

His egotistical antics bring to mind the problem the Obamas had with the First Lady's first social secretary, Desiree Rogers. When that social climbing couple, Michaele and Tareq Salahi were able to crash the Obama's first state dinner, it was pointed out that Ms. Rogers was swanning around as a guest at the dinner, making her grand entrance in her designer gown, posing for pictures for Vogue and the like, rather than attending to and executing her duties as the party planner. Rogers was forced to "resign" shortly thereafter. One hopes Gibbs is similarly on his way out.

[Taverner]

18. Pride cometh before a fall

...

[Whisp]

19. are you putting lemon juice on his statements and reading

secret stuff between the lines? Because what you are saying and what he is saying (and has been pointed out here a few thousand times since it made the headlines) just does not jive at all. You Want to Believe he Said Something .... that you want to outrage about. Yeah, sounds crazy because it is.

====

"There are a small number of people on cable and elsewhere who will never be happy, who will never give the President credit for anything, and who will always look for some cardinal sin to be upset about," the press secretary said in an email to the Huffington Post.

"I also stand by my statement... that the vast majority of progressives and those on the left, whether that's bloggers or groups or what have you, do not hold those beliefs and are pushing in good faith for a better country as they see it," Gibbs added. "The President has urged those who want change to push for it and hold him accountable, and that's how he feels."

==They Call Me Mr. Gibbs.

[Ramulux]

20. What?

What did I embelish? Please explain what is wrong with the logic of what I said. I used Gibbs' comments to make a point about how this administration is absolutely terrible at playing politics and doesnt seem to understand what progressives want and expect of him.

[Whisp]

21. I don't understand why you are so upset

when Gibbs wasn't talking about you or anyone here. the target is way way much narrower than where your imaginings take you. Do you not see the contrast between your OP and what Gibbs actually said?

[EFerrari]

25. You should post that as an OP to avoid having to post it hundreds of times

to all the posters here who actually heard or read his remarks.

[Skittles]

31. CORRECT

[Whisp]

32. what did you hear?

if you could provide a clip please of what he actually said instead of what you think (or hope?) he said?

and do you consider allowing gay couples visitation rights in hospitals a progressive change?

[Ramulux]

27. The point is this

Gibbs is trying to paint people who have real problems with the way Obama has governed as a small majority that does not represent the progressive community. I realize that in his follow up comments he tries to narrow it down to people who hate Obama no matter what for no reason but hes doing that to downplay his original criticism. Gibbs has not disowned his original comments, he has exemplified them. He is trying to make ideas like withdrawal from Afghanistan and universal health care seem fringy and that those who want those things are unreasonable and need to be "drug tested".

This is all part of the broader point I was trying to make about how Gibbs and this administration are misunderstanding what we want and what we expect of him. I am in no way faulting Obama for not doing all the things we want him to do, the problem I and others like myself have is that he is not even attempting to fight for the things we believe in and he himself seemed to believe in just 2 years ago. Gibbs' is trying to deflect this legitimate criticism by making the false claim that all progressives are mad because he hasnt done everything we want him do. This is false and intellectually dishonest and he is doing this so that this administration can just brush off any criticism as being unreasonable and "unrealistic".

I then go on to make the point that if Obama and his administration do not understand how extremely stupid allowing Gibbs to make these comments is, at least in a political sense, then they are living in a bubble in which no progressive or progressive idea is allowed.

[Whisp]

29. can I ask you if this is a progressive idea...

Allowing same sex couples to be able to visit each other in hospital.
One would think this would be a given, that only a barbaric and backward country would deny a loved one time to spend at a sick partners bedside. But until not too long ago, the United States of America allowed hospitals to deny visitation based on sexual preference.

and Obama changed that.
That is what I call progress. Do you not see this as progress?

This is just one things among many others, but I will ask you about this one only. Is this progressive? Yes or No.

[Ramulux]

33. No

thats common sense. Taking the other side of a disgusting bigoted argument doesnt make it a progressive argument. But thats not the point, and you are bringing up a different subject entirely. I never said this administration has done nothing good, I have enormously appreciated many of the things they have done and I'll admit I was making a broad generalization when I said no progressive ideas are allowed in this white house. You want to take issue with that fine.

I am not some raving Obama hater and am more than willing to give him props when he earns it and my argument does not make any claims about Obama being a horrible president or not having done anything good.

I will reiterate my main point once again. This administration is politically inept and dont seem to understand what progressives want and expect of him. I explain this at length in my previous post and if you want to disagree on that focus on that issue, not on whether or not Obama has done "anything" progressive which is a point I never addressed.

[Whisp]

34. you are saying progressives didn't want hospital visitation rights for gays?

Or don't consider it important enough to be blessed as called progressive?

The subject is not different, you pretty well said Obama and his team are not only not progressive, but they are deliberately holding back on progress. That pretty well what you said, is that correct?

[Ramulux]

36. Sigh

Did you even read what I wrote? I am not having this conversation with you, you are trying to get me to agree with something I never disagreed with. You are not addressing the point of my post and trying to start an argument where there is none. I never said this administration has done nothing that progressives would agree with. I stated my point very clearly in my last post.

[Whisp]

37. these are your words:

""I then go on to make the point that if Obama and his administration do not understand how extremely stupid allowing Gibbs to make these comments is, at least in a political sense, then they are living in a bubble in which no progressive or progressive idea is allowed.""

If I am reading it wrong, what is it you really meant to say? I see it as Obama is living in a progressiveless bubble that will allow no progressive ideas... pretty sure that's it.

[Divernan]

41. You don't need legislation - just get yourself a full medical power of attorney

Under HIPPA, even heterosexual spouses can't get access to a great deal of medical information without a medical power of attorney. With a medical POA, you can visit AND grill the medical caregivers for all the test results, prognosis, full medical records, etc., which is what you need, especially if your partner is too sick to take charge of his/her own medical decision-making.

[Jackpine Radical]

24. Why does Obama want the left to keep pushing?

Easy.

He wants a visible but ineffectual left to position himself against with taunts and slams so that the valued independent voters can see that he is not one of those scary liberals.

[Divernan]

38. When the left pushes, the lobbyists pony up with more money for Obama & the Blue Dogs.

You are absolutely spot on with your statement. I saw this in the state legislature every session. There were a number of bills which would negatively impact the profit margin of various Big Interest Groups. The legislators from both parties would take turns re-introducing them each session. The bills would be referred to appropriate committees, the chairmen of which would then hold some hearings. The fact of those hearings brought the lobbyists out of the woodwork with their checkbooks and amendments aimed at gutting the bills. The bills were never brought to the full House or Senate for a public vote (can't get those legislators on record that way) and died at the end of each session.

Next session? Wash, lather, repeat. It was a win-win for the legislators and their buddies, the lobbyists (often former legislators). The legislators got their fat campaign donations from Big Construction, Big Insurance, Big Pharma, etc. and the lobbyists got lots of reimbursable face time meeting with every single legislator.

As many have pointed out, until Obama & his administration give representatives of the progressive left seats at the negotiating table - he's all talk, no action.

[glitch]

45. What is this, a conspiracy theory?

:rofl:

[inna]

26. i wish Obama got rid of him. and Rahm. and Timmeh. and some others.

[old mark]

28. He is paid to say what he is saying...he does not "misspeak" - what he is saying

IS the administrations message to us- "Fuck you and don't forget to vote".

Gibbs is a professional and one of the best at what he does - none of this is accidental spur of the moment...witness his "apology" - he was "artless"...not that he said the wrong thing, but that he said it poorly...

He is carrying our President's message to us.
Get it?

mark

Fired Up?

Um, yeah, sure....


mark

[NorthCarolina]

35. It seems clear that the Administration wo9uld rather not hold a majority in Congress

As a GOP controlled Senate would allow them to do the work of the DLC under the cover of plausible deniability. Pushing conservative legislation such as Romney care, escalation of troops in Afghanistan, wall street bailouts, major changes to entitlements, etc. when the White House, the House, and the Senate are all Democratically controlled puts a spotlight on the true politics of the DLC, and makes it difficult to claim a progressive mantle, or sell themselves as agents of change.

[NorthCarolina]

39. Personally, I hope he keeps talking. We are being given a brids eye view

of how DC really works, and what our magnanimous representatives really think of the voting public they 'serve'. Quite informative really. In his comments, Gibbs laid it out plain as day that the reason we have no public option or single payer health care system, is because all legislation in DC is bought and paid for by corporate interests. Let him keep talking.

[Divernan]

40. Special interests actually DRAFT the legislation.

Lobbyists show up with their campaign contribution check in one hand, and the pre-drafted legislation/bills in the other. The prime sponsor gets the biggest check, and introduces the bill; then the lobbyists helpfully trot it around to all the other legislators and give them checks in exchange for their signing on as co-sponsors.

[NorthCarolina]

42. Trading votes for $$. Two parties vying for the same pot of gold. eom

[aikoaiko]

46. Is it possibly tactical?

Left will mostly vote him Obama anyway out of fear of a worse alternative.

By beating up on the moderate to far left, they think they will woo more moderate conservative votes than losses from the left.


I dunno....

[Steely_Dan]

47. Our Party Runs On...

...a spectrum. Positions and ideas overlap each other all the time. Does it really matter if you are labelled a "Leftist" or "Progressive" or "Liberal", etc. etc? We are all Dems. So....

When Mr. Gibbs criticizes a part of our party, he is (in a sense) criticizing all of our party.

Sure...I may not be a Leftist...but I share some of their ideas and support them in their efforts. Was it really necessary for Mr. Gibbs to even go there?

I'm confused.

This furthers my belief that this administration is unsophisticated in their political acumen. There have been too many silly mistakes to assess it otherwise.

-PLA

[Enthusiast]

48. Gibbs has got to go! nt

[LWolf]

49. What new remarks?

Link, please!

:hi:

[femrap]

50. I want him fired. nt

[quiet.american]

51. Unless you're a paid talking head who regularly compares Obama to Bush --

-- and as a matter of "principle" routinely advocates against the Democratic Party, yet claims to be on the "left," Gibbs wasn't talking about you.

What is so hard to grasp about that?

[dogday]

52. Does anyone doubt that the President has control over Gibbs?

I watched west-wing, I know that the President tells his Chief Of Staff to lay down the law, the President's way. Am I wrong about this? Does the President just sit in the office and not take notice of what Gibbs is saying about the left side of the aisle?

[formercia]

53. "Washington echo chamber "

In my neck of the Woods, it's known as having your head up your ass. Blow hard and hear it echo.