Friday, July 24
Obama regrets the stupid comment
He seems to have aptly defused the situation and, in typical Obama fashion, turned it in to a teachable moment—so hopefully the frenzy will die down now..
At least some amusement came out of it with the lawn comments at the end.
Earlier I thought "Gates is the new Sanford" because I found this to be an unwelcome distraction from more substantive issues. But maybe that's selfish of me and shedding light on this kind of thing really is "part of the portfolio"—so hopefully he won't botch it into such a great frenzy next time.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(1987)
-
▼
July
(180)
- Dept. of good ideas II
- Looking beyond the immediate
- Reality check
- Dept. of good ideas
- Jill and Kevin's last day
- More on The Evolution of God
- Birthers of a nation
- In praise of greed
- Understocked
- Irrational hopes dashed, wrong lessons drawn
- Deep thought
- The myth of free-market health-care
- Zero tolerance policy
- Uh-oh
- "I now pronounce you monetized."
- Baffling
- And now back to your regularly scheduled programing
- Sane Republican sighting
- Meet the new boss...
- The "goodies"
- Children of the revolution
- The most important part of health-care reform
- Wyden not?
- Tyler Cowen explains what this blog is about
- Uh-oh
- Mobocracy
- Punchline
- An (un)fortunate health-care irony
- Sigh
- More Dem infighting
- Reality check
- Thanks for all the fish
- Why Megan opposes national healthcare
- House bill TKOed?
- Punchline
- 47 million, ctd.
- 25 years too late
- Irony of the day
- Where compromise is happening
- Wallabies
- KY-Sen update: Bunning drops out
- Nietzsche, updated for Palin
- Quote of the day
- Authority and conflict
- Beauty evolves
- And you thought food was expensive
- "Blue Dog Bozos"
- Love and learning
- Clutch finish
- Question of trust
- Haven't we been through this before?
- OMB vs. CBO
- Wedding entrance
- An unequal relationship
- Sigh-inducing quote of the day
- Minimum wage debate
- Tall people are happy
- Beware of Greeks bearing gifts
- Rebalancing the economy
- Supply and demand is not—repeat NOT—optional
- "Things will be worse if we add to the costs witho...
- "Abstinence-Supporting GOP State Lawmaker Admits T...
- Obama regrets the stupid comment
- 47 million
- Summer viewing
- Deep thought
- How Obama stumbled on healthcare
- Doctor apologizes for insensitivity
- Above and beyond
- Free fallin'
- "100 Things Your Kid May Never Know About"
- Obama and racial hypersensitivity
- Paying for play
- That boy needs therapy.
- What, me arrogant?
- "Married 54 Years, They Chose to Die Together"
- A longer view on the deficit and entitlements
- Photo of the day
- a little lower, please
- Dancing on the grave of the F-22
- Beating up on the Fed
- Challenge to the left: state your limits
- Yglesias vs. Yglesias
- Change!
- Same-name couple to wed
- Faux persecution
- Obama's health-care call with liberal bloggers
- "The Case Against the Case Against Taxing Health C...
- Prison reform
- "Vatican Unequivocally Confirms Automatic Excommun...
- Bad news is good news
- "A Negative Word"
- Derb's agenda
- Never gonna give that grungy teen spirit up
- Reading The Evolution of God
- Antony and the Johnsons cover Beyoncé
- Colorado traffic control
- Stimulus, then and now
- Cronkite and the Dolchstoß right
- New hi-res photos of lunar landing sites
-
▼
July
(180)
With regard to saying it was appropriate to step into it even though it was a local issue is wrong. He could step into any issue he wants but he has to wait until the appropriate time.
ReplyDeleteAs a lawyer, he knows he should not have stepped into it until the issue was resolved. He has now prejudiced any juries if this were to go to trial, civil or criminal. In fact, it may preclude Gates from suing the city for false arrest, or it may preclude the police officer from filing a defamation suit. Charges against Gates have been dropped, so no criminal trial, but a civil trial by either one of them is still possible.
I don't think it's quite right to expect uninvolved people to avoid commenting on something (esp. a publicized event) just because it could, potentially, be litigated.
ReplyDelete