Bubble 1, Obama staffers 0

Wed, 07/08/2009 - 7:08am

During the transition, Barack Obama voiced numerous concerns about being trapped in the Presidential "bubble," cut off from the rest of the real world. Oddly enough, this is also a concern of 30 Rock. 

If this New York Times story by Clifford J. Levy and Ellen Barry is any indication, the bubble seems to have completely enveloped Obama's White House staff: 

Crowds did not clamor for a glimpse of him. Headlines offered only glancing or flippant notice of his activities. Television programming was uninterrupted; devotees of the Russian Judge Judy had nothing to fear. Even many students and alumni of the Western-oriented business school where Mr. Obama gave the graduation address on Tuesday seemed merely respectful, but hardly enthralled....

Some Obama aides said they were struck by the low-key reception here, especially when compared with the outpouring on some of his other foreign trips. Even Michelle Obama, who typically enjoys admiring coverage in the local news media when she travels, has not had her every move chronicled here.

Seriously?  Seriously?!  The President of the United States visits a staunchly nationalist country that has significant conflicts with Washington, and the charm offensive didn't take?  Well, blow me down!! 

When/if Obama visits China and India, his staffers might have some more rude awakenings in their future.  

 

Daniel W. Drezner | Permalink | | Comments? Login or register
( filed under: )


Advertisement

 

Wow

by Gyuri on Wed, 07/08/2009 - 11:34am

What an odd response to that article.

You imply a vast understanding of the staff being stuck in the presidential bubble (including the use of repetition, italics and the dreaded double punctuation?!) based entirely off of a single line in the article that gives you barely any support for your point.

This is an entire article crafted from the perspectitve that, to paraphrase Billy Beane, Obama's shit don't work in Russia. The only quote from an Administration source isn't even a quote at all, but rather a characterization of comments from "some Obama aides", which most likely were the result of the following conversation: "Have you noticed that the reception is low-key here relative to other places Obama has visited?" "Yes."

It's also worth noting that the Michelle Obama portion of that sentence is simply the reporters cataloging of facts, and includes no reaction whatsoever from anyone.

Seriously? Seriously?! You got an entire post out of that weak sauce? [And, for that matter, I posted an entire comment about this?!] Slow news day?

Seriously, you were so much

by blue13326 on Wed, 07/08/2009 - 11:39am

Seriously, you were so much more interesting when you focused on economic commentary. I know things are depressing on that front, and you might have to slam Obama fairly hard on his policies, but your IR stuff just doesn't hold up.

Here, I'll suggest an economics topic for you that doesn't involve Obama: Apparently, China has just imprisoned four executives of Rio Tinto, after the company snubbed them on a deal, and has accused them of spying:

http://www.businessinsider.com/did-china-arrest-australian-execs-for-snubbing-them-on-a-deal-2009-7

In 500 words or less, please explain what this means for Asian relations, as well as China and the world's economy.

That whole NY Times article

by Brett on Wed, 07/08/2009 - 5:26pm

That whole NY Times article stuck in my craw, to some degree. Why is it a big deal that our President is treated like anything other than a celebrity? I'd much rather he be treated just like he was - as an important Head of State who will probably make several visits, assuming they are serious about their nuclear drawdown.

For that matter, does any serious population of television-viewing Americans care when, say, Stephen Harper (head of Canada, our neighbor, most important trading partner, and biggest single source of foreign oil) drops in? How about Medvedev?

Maybe it's the New York Times

by MDrew on Thu, 07/09/2009 - 5:53pm

that has some rude awakenings coming. Or you. So the aides were "struck." That's not "taken aback" or "caught short-footed when their charm offensive failed to win over the entire Russian governmental elite."

I'm "struck" by the way the NYTimes, David Rothkopf, you, and many others just proceed on basis of an assumption that your own bullshit is the underlying reality, and how attached to these absurd imaginings you all seem to be.

Russians too busy to worship Obama's Af-Pak Vietnam....

by sakel on Fri, 07/10/2009 - 6:29pm

Perhaps the Russians are far more cynical in their home-grown political perspective and pragmatism is the affliction that has replaced communism? Surely, the Afghanistan experience must have left them allergic to any celebrity worshipping! In the 90s, they were led down the river to be sold for so many worthless rubles.

So, the Russians are being frugal. They're spending only $60Billion on their military budget, while Barack's budget is $665B and China's a meagre $65B. Plus billions for over 1000 bases all over this world of misery. Meantime, "democratic" Congress approved $106B further sum for the Obama new Vietnam Wars in Af-PaK whilst "rental" of the Pakistani army is costing the taxpayers $1.3B per day!

So far, Obama's bloody, quixotic and Bushian Afganistan dream has created over 3 million refugees (Holbrook's own estimate and he wants Europeans to give aid!) in the Af-Pak border with hundreds of children severely crippled by landmines and American CIA-directed drones, and diseases multiplying by the day. As if the Bushian Iraqi nightmare weren't enough,eh?

How's that for Hope and Change, eh? Perhaps if only Barack had attended an Eastern Orthodox mass instead....and prayed minus the teleprompter....

From Russia, always with love

by Ianus on Sat, 07/11/2009 - 8:06pm

Well, there is absolutely no wonder that the Obama charm offensive did not work in Russia! There are several explanations to this, and I guess that alongside Russia being “a staunchly nationalist country,” David Rothkopf grasped very well that the problem is that “the President is the policy…” And America needs to put more serious cards on the table, except Obama's smile. What Obama (and his staffers, eventually) should understand is that things do not happen just because Obama is Obama.

It takes more than charm and smiles to touch the Russian soul. Obama’s staffers should have warned him that most probably the Russians want America to prove itself through good, correct behavior during negotiations/interactions, as well as a clear-cut, straightforward approach to the Russian counterpart(s).