Cue the Obama speech about bipartisanship
And the lecture about putting an end to politics where “the only goal is to see who can get the most embarrassing headlines about the other side.” From the AP:
Even the White House’s top spokesman is getting in on the act of mocking former Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin for looking to talking points written on her palm during a speech to “tea party” activists.
Robert Gibbs showed the words “hope” and “change” on his hand as he started his daily briefing with reporters on Tuesday.
Many in the room, where President Barack Obama had spoken just moments before about the need for bipartisanship, groaned at the political shot.
Palin spoke Saturday in Nashville and photographs and video show she had “energy,” ”tax” and “lift American spirits” on her hand. During one question, she looked down at the palm of her hand for a cue.
In her speech she mocked Obama’s use of teleprompters.
Yes, the president talked about bipartisanship just before Gibbs’ stunt.
Granted, Palin’s handy cheat sheet came across as amateurish. But can the president’s own spokesman not adhere to what the president just finished talking about?
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
134 comments Add your comment
neo-Carlinist
February 9th, 2010
5:32 pm
here’s the deal, and I am no defender of Gibbs or his boss, but bi-partisan suggests to me, within the government. for example, within the executive and legislative branches. Palin is no longer in the game. she’s a talking head (and not a very bright one, at that). she has walked away from the game in order to participate in the other game (right-wing nut-job media). what I find amusing about the whole deal is, what good are crib notes on one’s palm, if the person speaking cannot read?
Davo
February 9th, 2010
5:33 pm
Spot on, Kyle. This did nothing for Obama’s administration other than add more fuel to the fire of discord from the ‘Tea Party Movement’.
And besides, it’s not nice to make fun of retar….ummm…Sarah.
Kyle Wingfield
February 9th, 2010
5:39 pm
I disagree, neo-Carl. Gibbs knew exactly what he was doing: tweaking a popular GOP figure (she doesn’t have to still hold office to represent the Republican Party) in order to get some cheap laughs.
If the press corps really did groan disapprovingly — I haven’t watched a video — then good for them.
Jess
February 9th, 2010
5:58 pm
I think the issue has gone much further than partisianship. There are actually many of us who do not claim strong partisian ties who are scared silly by what this government is doing. If Obama were to get half the republican Senators to sign on to a trillion dollar health care proposal, this does not mean the 60% to 70% of Americans who are happy with their health care arrangement are suddenly going to support the proposal. We know a financial train wreck when we see one, and we see one.
I think if anything Obama has shaken many people completely out of their partisian house into truly informed, independant voters.
Ragnar Danneskjöld
February 9th, 2010
6:19 pm
There are two meaningful political drivers: (1) partisanship, and (2) ideology. Some rare people are both, most lean to one or the other. Some rise above partisanship to sustain an ideological view of the world, e.g., RINOs or blue dog democrats in some circumstances. Others compromise their principles in order to make a deal, one that advances the purposes of the party, e.g., Pres Bush 41 on taxes, or Pres Bush 43 on spending, Pres Clinton on NAFTA and welfare reform.
I am an ideologue – I know what I think, and I pursue that vision of truth and goodness wherever it leads. President Obama proclaims that he is not an ideologue, and he decries partisanship; I sense dishonesty, but I am uncertain in which Chauncey-esque proclamation.
joan1
February 9th, 2010
6:20 pm
Having a “crib” of 3 words is a long shot from having every word on a teleprompter. And yes, Gibbs is showing what a mean spirited bunch of people hang out at 1600. Somebody reminded me today that all the top Democrats are lawyers. Maybe that explains why they don’t know too much. They are obviously lousy lawyers or they could be making a lot more money working for firms.
Ragnar Danneskjöld
February 9th, 2010
6:22 pm
I just realized the flaw in my own argument, the false dichotomy. It is perfectly logical to stand for nothing, if you stand only for yourself.
CJ
February 9th, 2010
6:36 pm
I’m sorry, but Democrats making fun of a Republican leader for committing the pre-adolescent act of writing crib notes on her hand, as opposed to writing them on a note card or a piece of paper, is not an example of partisanship.
On the other hand, Republicans preventing nearly every piece of legislation and multiple presidential appointees, including legislation and appointees many Republicans support, from getting an up or down vote in the Senate for short-term political gain–now that’s partisanship.
CJ
February 9th, 2010
6:41 pm
Incidentally Jess, the health care bill that passed the Senate reduces the deficit, according to the CBO, by $132 billion in the first decade and $1 trillion in the second. I know a misinformed person when I see one, and I see one.
Ragnar Danneskjöld
February 9th, 2010
6:48 pm
Dear CJ @ 6:36, I respectfully disagree. I think the republicans are acting ideologically in their opposition to the leftist agenda and to leftist nominees. Whether there is a partisan benefit is also a theoretically open question, but I think the ideological divide creates a political benefit for republicans, so maybe it is a twofer.
Ragnar Danneskjöld
February 9th, 2010
6:51 pm
Dear Bard @ 6:43, “I don’t buy the argument that the GOP really cares about [healthcare reform.]” I think you are mostly correct, but that you seriously understated the depth of the loyal opposition to the administration’s proposals. On the whole we are more concerned about the broad destruction the private economy suffers from the President’s agenda, and healthcare is only a portion of that concern.
Jess
February 9th, 2010
6:59 pm
CJ,
The bill has a price tag of over one trillion dollars. The estimate on reducing the deficit assumes savings in health care which no one but Congress says will happen. Notice I didn’t say think will happen. They aren’t even that dense.
CJ
February 9th, 2010
7:09 pm
Check the record Ragnar. There are multiple instances where Republicans voted to pass legislation or approve appointees today that they filibustered yesterday. For example, our own Senator Johnny Isakson voted with Republicans to block an up or down vote on Medicare cuts in 2008. Then when a very sick Edward Kennedy arrived to cast the vote needed to break the Republican filibuster, Isakson voted for the cuts that he tried to block a vote on just a few moments earlier.
CJ
February 9th, 2010
7:19 pm
“The estimate on reducing the deficit assumes savings in health care which no one but Congress says will happen.”
First of all Jess, the senate HCR bill was scored by the CBO at less than $900 billion–not over one trillion as you suggest. In addition, it saves more than it costs–hence the deficit reduction.
Also, it’s not Congress that “assumes” savings. The CBO scored the savings, and scores of independent health care economists/experts agree. The senate HCR bill contains several cost control measures that you might like to explore.
Jess
February 9th, 2010
7:23 pm
The CBO does the math based on the numbers and assumptions given them by Congress, regardless of whether they believe them.
JD
February 9th, 2010
7:46 pm
And what was the reduction in Medicare? 500 million a year? Where exactly would this reduction in spending come? The bill is a joke!
There are misinformed people but worse than that is a person who accepts partisan calculations and regurgitates them here. The Senate bill reduces a deficit of $1.8 TRILLION by 13.2 billion a year is supposed to speak well of the bill? One TRILLION over 10 years against ten year deficits of what, $20 TRILLION? And all of this assumes the US could add 45 million people to the medical roles without hiring doctors and nurses or adding hospitals and clinics – but still maintain the current level of care?
This bill is not about saving money, caring for the uninsured or even caring for our seniors of Medicare age or soon to be. This bill, as formulated by the Administration and leaders of the Congress, is about POWER! They hope to create tens of millions more people dependent upon government for their healthcare – in fact, the Left hopes to make everyone dependent upon government.
The health care plan is the antithesis of that which has made this a great country and counter to all the Founding Fathers and the colonists fought for 235 years ago. Not to mention the men who fought in WWI and WWII, as well as Korea, Viet Nam and the Middle East. This move to Socialism/Communism, as sponsored by the Democrats and the POTUS, must be defeated!
Formulate a plan that cares for the legal, US citizens who are currently without care, pass tort reform, rein in the corruption in the system, make the patient responsible for cost containment as they are for everything they buy (there are ways), and be absolutely certain the Congress, Courts and Administration lose their “special” plan and are covered as any other citizen. Likewise their retirement benefits.
That should do for a start!
neo-Carlinist
February 9th, 2010
7:55 pm
KW, I am not a “Republican”, but does Sarah Palin really “represent the Republican Party”? again, I never liked Gibbs, and you would hope the President’s Press Secretary would take the high road, but she did fire the first salvo with her teleprompter comments. I mean, let’s be adults here. she is presenting herself as a possible candidate in 2012 and she thinks the President’s reliance on teleprompters is an “issue”?
Ragnar Danneskjöld
February 9th, 2010
8:10 pm
Dear CJ @ 7:09, surely you do not cite Sen Isakson as a “conservative” or “ideologue.” The only reason I would vote for him is that the democrats are uniformly more leftist, thus worse. If a conservative – anyone who remotely resembles a conservative – qualifies to run against the good senator, I will vote for the insurgent republican.
@@
February 9th, 2010
8:18 pm
Gibbs is a doofus speaking on behalf of a doofus!
Cue the Obama speech about bipartisanship
All this talk about….
what he’s really saying is he’s wanting the GOP to jump aboard the dem’s parting, errrr sinking ship. No thanks.
Let the captain and his merry crew go down with their ship. ’tis the right thing to do.
Aaarrrgghhhhhhhh.
Democrats are Corrupt, Repukes are Lying Scum
February 9th, 2010
8:31 pm
Shouldn’t it be TRIpartisanship? After all, there are Dummycrats, Repuks, and Independents, right? Oh, the independents are already on Obama’s side, so the conversation is just about converting Repukes to Obama’s side, not about convincing Dummycrats and Independents of the errors of their ways. JUST SAY NO TO OBAMA, like this, “Yo Barak, go fly a kite.”
Democrats are Corrupt, Repukes are Lying Scum
February 9th, 2010
8:33 pm
ALL Palins are RETARDED SKAN KS.
LIberal Pariah
February 9th, 2010
9:32 pm
Obama’s concept of bipartisanship strikes me much the same as the way Lucy does good ole Charlie Brown on kicking the football. Get him to take a run at it and then pull the football away as he tries to kick it. He never wanted bipartisanship and still doesn’t. He is backpedaling until he gets to a point where he can ram his Far Left agenda down the throat of America. I hope Repubs in Washington don’t try to kick that football…..:-)
Rone
February 9th, 2010
9:37 pm
She had stuff written on her hands. Not coherrent valid talking points, but just words that anyone could remember. Am I the only one that thinks she is one of the dimmest bulbs in this country, if not the planet?
Rone
February 9th, 2010
9:39 pm
Oh, Liberal Pariah… Where were you when Bush was in office? He touted the same b stuff. You need to go back to school kiddo!
retiredds
February 9th, 2010
9:40 pm
Kyle, the whole hand thing is ridiculous. Here’s the real meat and I wonder what you think about this.
By JOSH FUNK (AP)
OMAHA, Neb. — Former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson predicted the U.S. government will regain every penny given to the nation’s banks during the economic meltdown and may even profit.
Billionaire Warren Buffett agreed with Paulson Tuesday that the bank bailout will eventually be profitable for the nation. The two men spoke at the Greater Omaha Chamber of Commerce’s annual meeting.
(I believe Bush appointed Paulsen and Warren Buffett is a pretty savvy investor).
Grumpy
February 9th, 2010
9:40 pm
Palin deserved it. It was funny. When did Republicans become such wimps? Compared to what the righty talking heads spew daily this was kiddie time.
Todd
February 9th, 2010
9:42 pm
You think Palin’s speech to the Baggers was “bi-partisan” (or to be more correct, non-partisan)? Why shouldn’t Obama’s spokesperson attack back at a currently non-political figure who launched into a diatribe against him? I would have been more impressed and pleased if Obama had done it himself!
LIberal Pariah
February 9th, 2010
9:46 pm
No Rone, GB gave into Ted Kennedy on Education and at least listened. Obama has reached out transparently on CSPAN how many times? That’s what I thought.
scott
February 9th, 2010
9:47 pm
No comparison, she has a few words on her hand, he needs a teleprompter to order at McDonald’s.
I’ll take the real amercian that takes a few notes on her hand all day long!
LIberal Pariah
February 9th, 2010
9:47 pm
Of course she had to use her hands, she can’t afford a Teleprompter like the Liar In Chief.
Rone
February 9th, 2010
9:48 pm
Obama’s concept of bipartisanship strikes me much the same as the way GW does good ole Charlie Brown on kicking the football. Get him to take a run at it and then pull the football away as he tries to kick it. GW never wanted bipartisanship and still doesn’t. He was hoping that a rightie gets into office so he can ram his Far Righty agenda down the throat of America. I hope Dems in Washington don’t try to kick that football…..:-) With Love, Rone 2008
Rone
February 9th, 2010
9:50 pm
too easy
scott
February 9th, 2010
9:52 pm
Hey CJ get the facts, on HCare
It might (a BIG Might) save after they make you pay for it for 3 years before offering it the next 7. 10 years of paying for 7 years of use, Hmmmmmmm? Nice Math!
Btw, can you name a gov’t program that ever saved a Penny? Didn’t think so. They get bloated year after year with EVERY budget. Just look at its payroll last 2-3 years, ginormous. While everyone else is being laid off. But don’t let history or facts get in your way.
IC Atlanta
February 9th, 2010
9:53 pm
A-Clowns will be A-Clowns! I hope Gibbs, Obama and Rahm enjoyed their cheap laugh at the expense of the tidal wave that will over take them in November.
Some bi-partisan leadership by the President’s spokesman. Seems like they got their manners from the Daily Kos.
Rone
February 9th, 2010
10:01 pm
Oh Righties… Or Wingnuts… you had your 8 years to put this country into the s slide that it currently finds itself in. Maybe if a Republican gets elected over Obama in ‘12, he (or most unlikely she) may just turn things around.
Rone
February 9th, 2010
10:04 pm
You are all whiners!!!! We have a president in office that is not a complete idiot! You b and m about how this country should be run, but not one of you can defend the idiocy that was GWB.
Rone
February 9th, 2010
10:05 pm
Peace out. I work for a living.
Tricky
February 9th, 2010
10:05 pm
They all use Teleprompters, Obama, Bush, Palin (Palm Pilot) all of them do it. It is/was hypocritical for Plain to go around giving the president advice on how to win the next election in 2012, by going to war with Iran. What does she know about winning elections? Or even serving full terms for that matter. It is just her way of trying to stay relevant and make money, and even all of her defenders privately know what an embarrassment she is. Republicans are saying “Run Sarah Run!”, oh man how I wish.
Dr. R
February 9th, 2010
10:05 pm
It was a joke. If you can’t laugh at yourself, you’re not worthy of my vote or my company. Get a life.
Legend of Len Barker
February 9th, 2010
10:10 pm
For Palin’s repeated “death panel” lie and attempts to incite crowds by appealing to the lowest common redneck, she deserves everything she gets.
I have a higher opinion of junebugs than I do John McCain, but at least McCain was embarrassed by the crowd response during the 2008 campaign and tried to settle his crowd down. Palin revels in such. She wants to you to believe that not only is Islam a naturally violent religion, but that Barack Obama is a Muslim. Likewise, in a mayoral race back in Wasilla, Palin played up anti-Semitism against a candidate who wasn’t Jewish.
It may not have been the best taste to mock Sarah Palin, but this is a woman who mocked President Obama for using a teleprompter while she herself needs notecards and notes on her hand and while she herself has used a teleprompter (that herky-jerky resignation speech last year was delivered via teleprompter) and her hero Ronald Reagan was arguably the first politician to popularize their use.
There is nothing that Sarah Palin says that isn’t hypocritical, yet she’s somehow still pretty much a sacred cow. No one is allowed to mock her or point out that she doesn’t have all her Crayolas in the box.
Tricky
February 9th, 2010
10:12 pm
Amen Legend, nuff said.
Rone
February 9th, 2010
10:12 pm
Why would Palin subject herself to such a witch-hunt (like the whole GWB prompter in the back of his suit ala the 2004 debate) unless she had to. Did she really need 3 talking points written on her hand? Really?
Todd - Dacula
February 9th, 2010
10:14 pm
Kyle, if you were a 30-something liberal, you’d be writing just the opposite. When you conservative’s stop mocking and disrespecting President Obama (but some how found absolutely nothing wrong with former Preesiden Bush’s blunders) who is an intelligent President, trying to bring the country back from Bush’s hole, things will get better. Conservative would rather drive the country in the ground just because they are not in-charge; talk about love for the country… Conservative’s just love being in charge, regardless of how bad things get when they are in office.
Palin isnt stupid; just stupid for not being herself. She is turning to what she thinks Conservative’s want her to be. She will never Win a presidential election.
Liberal Pariah
February 9th, 2010
10:15 pm
I don’t disagree with you Len but the sad Truth is that she is STILL more qualified than OBAMA to hold an Executive Office. Now that’s a sad commentary on both of them.
Rone
February 9th, 2010
10:15 pm
Well put, Legend.
Chuck
February 9th, 2010
10:17 pm
It’s nice to see both sides raising to the level of discourse to such a high level.
We’re being ruled by self-serving dullards… and wannabe self-serving dullards.
Rone
February 9th, 2010
10:18 pm
Wow!!! Liberal Pariah has just written the most inane thing I have ever read. Congrats!!!
Ben
February 9th, 2010
10:20 pm
BAHAHAHA! Lighten up people. Palin is a clown.
Rone
February 9th, 2010
10:20 pm
Self serving dullard? I prefer to be served as a true American dullard. Paid for, and up to snuff.
Liberal Pariah
February 9th, 2010
10:25 pm
Rone, if you had put their resumes side by side before the election and did not have names on them, Saracuda would be given the offer over BO if the job was Executive Office Holder. Guess what that says about the both of them? BTW, You Are Welcome