In The Blogs

Dinner With Barack

| Wed Jan. 14, 2009 11:12 AM PST

DINNER WITH BARACK....Last night Barack Obama had dinner with conservative uberpundits Bill Kristol, George Will, David Brooks, and Charles Krauthammer. If George Bush had done something similar with liberal columnists eight years ago, Jon Chait thinks wingers would have gone ballistic:

And the reason is that they wouldn't have confidence in Bush or McCain to be surrounded by liberal ideas without being deeply influenced by them.

....And that's why liberals aren't having a cow. They know that Obama understands far more about policy than any of his right-wing dinner companions, is used to being exposed to opposing ideas, and won't come out of that dinner telling his staff, "Hey, did you know we cut half the capital gains tax and raise more revenue?"

I don't know if Obama thinks he can actually persuade Kristol & Co. to support his ideas, but he's self-aware enough to know that a face-to-face meeting can change the tone of criticism even if it doesn't stop it. Once you've met someone in person, it's just a little bit harder to be really nasty toward them in print. It's the same dynamic that makes it hard to unload both barrels against a debate opponent: things are different in person than they are when they happen second or third hand. Obama's demonstrating yet again that he's a smart cookie.

Continues Below

Continued From Above

Comments

Submitted by Ropty (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 11:08 AM PST.

And who could have Bush met with? Paul Krugman? There are no liberal columnists in major papers, are there?

Submitted by Ramki (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 11:18 AM PST.

A "smart cookie"? That's RACIST!! :-P

Submitted by geoff (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 11:22 AM PST.

Wasn't Bush known for charming the reporters who were covering him? Different cohort, same general idea.

Submitted by karog (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 11:31 AM PST.

There may or may not be an infinite number of alternate universes but I am certain if there are, not a one of them has Bush sharing dinner with any group of liberals, columnists or otherwise.

Submitted by Keith G (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 11:41 AM PST.

Kevin, among the reason I value you and the blogs you have developed is the lack of hysteria from you and from the cool group of commentators you attract. As a side note, this is a plus for Steve Bennen as well.

While I like much of the work done at Americablog, Open Left, Think Progress and the Juicebox Mafia (I kid), their commenters can get quite screechy. Don't know if that is due a general lack of faith, not paying attention or DNA, but it has been a sometimes guilty pleasure of mine to drop in and see the reaction to the latest perceived slight from the PEOTUS. Though, it is getting a tad old.

Eg.:

While Obama is trashing gay people, he's breaking bread with all of the Conservative pundits. Obama is a self absorbed sell out that misled the electorate!

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/13/obama-right-wingers/

Priceless.

Submitted by Tripp (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 11:44 AM PST.

Keith G,

lack of hysteria

that is one of the nicest ways I've ever been called an old fart.

Thanks dude.

Submitted by Keith G (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 11:44 AM PST.

BTW, I want to make sure that it is clear the the quote I used above in from an individual comment and not from a blog post.

Submitted by PFL (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 11:46 AM PST.

"Once you've met someONE in person, it's harder to be nasty to HIM in print." Single noun, single verb, I'm thinking.

Submitted by Keith G (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 11:52 AM PST.

Tripp, So are you a pre-cusp boomer?

Submitted by thersites (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 11:58 AM PST.

PFL,

speaking as one pedantic @$$ to another: Strictly speaking, you're correct, but the emerging practice seems to be to use THEM as the gender-free pronoun, even in the singular. I suspect that's what Kevin is doing here.

Tripp,
You're not an old fart. You kids today are just calm from sniffing glue or something.

Submitted by thersites (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 11:59 AM PST.

Keith,
I think Tripp is on the cusp between cuspers and boomers. Makes him a "B Cusp," I suppose.

Submitted by stand (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 12:06 PM PST.

Isn't this just the same as the whole "Do we talk to Iran?" issue we had during the campaign?

Submitted by Dancer (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 12:18 PM PST.

Let's not fool ourselves about some NUTCASES on the left being just as upset that Obama would even consider being in the room with these fellas...you know there will be commenters who are for sure...I'm here betting the "honeymoon" won't last until t he morning of the 21st...Time for folks to step up and SHUT UP the stupid media and, sadly, many in the blogosphere (HUFFPO this includes you)!!!

Submitted by Chris Brown (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 12:26 PM PST.

Obama is wise enough to realize that a bit of stroking of monstrous egos goes a long way.

Submitted by slanted tom (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 1:16 PM PST.

If Obama could dine with those guests, he could sail a number 9 storm and never blow his cookies.

He's conclusively proven his intestinal fortitude.

Submitted by supersaurus (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 1:46 PM PST.

forgive my cynicism, but why would anyone waste time on that particular group? does anyone sitting on the fence actually read a snooty george will column, a krauthammer hyperventilation, a brooks meander or an empty bag by kristol and suddenly see the light? is there no more valuable group upon which to spend one's valuable hour? why not limbaugh?

Submitted by Rick B (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 1:51 PM PST.

There are no liberal columnists in major papers, are there?

At the time, Molly Ivins was still living and writing. But other than her and Krugman, and maybe Bob Herbert (at that time a column in the NY Times automatically made you big time) you're right. There were no other big name liberal columnists.

Submitted by Econobuzz (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 2:50 PM PST.

Once you've met someone in person, it's just a little bit harder to be really nasty toward them in print.

Really? How did that work for Bill Clinton and Al Gore?

Hate to break up the circle jerk here but, for me, for BO to have dinner with the clowns who enabled Shrub for eight years is fucking pathetic.

Submitted by Edo (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 3:06 PM PST.

And who could have Bush met with? Paul Krugman? There are no liberal columnists in major papers, are there?

At the time, Tom Oliphant at the Boston Globe. EJ Dionne at the Washington Post. Cynthia Tucker at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Submitted by Brian (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 3:39 PM PST.

Sure. Bush has dinner with Paul Krugman, EJ Dionne, David Corn and Bob Herbert (or whomever) and suddenly he's for higher taxes, gay marriage, and abortion. Sure. Chait is a moron.

Submitted by Cazart (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 4:00 PM PST.

".Last night Barack Obama had dinner with conservative uberpundits Bill Kristol, George Will, David Brooks, and Charles Krauthammer...."

Let's drop in and see how it went. (CUE DREAM SEQUENCE: diddle-iddle-a, diddle-iddle-a...)

OBAMA: "Well, gentlemen, I suppose we'll be working together somewhat closely over the next few years - I hope we can find some common ground. David, could you pass the rolls? David? David? DAVID!"

BROOKS: "I'm sorry, sir. I was lost in your eyes."

OBAMA: "Ahem. Yes. Well. As I was saying..."

KRAUTHAMMER: ""Rolls?!" "Pass the rolls!?" Only a deluded liberal would eat rolls while Israel faces an existential threat!"

OBAMA: "Well, Charles.."

WILL: "You want an "existential threat?" The designated hitter! What are you going to do about THAT, Mister President Smarty Pants?"

OBAMA: "Well, George..."

KRISTOL: "He's not President yet! I think McCain still has a shot at this thing!"

OBAMA (getting up) "Um..."

BROOKS: (in That Britney Guy mode) "LEAVE OBAMA ALONE!"

....aaaaaaaaand scene.

Submitted by Paul Miller (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 5:59 PM PST.

I have no problem with Obama having dinner with these people specifically, but it does seem these days that, in some circles, anything Obama does is perceived as brilliant and beyond any suspicion or even much curiosity. I guess we've waited a long time to have a god from the left, but, still, it's a bit thick at times.

Submitted by Samerkand (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 6:36 PM PST.

I'll guarantee you Obama didn't try to change their views. What he likely said was let's agree, disagree or compromise based on our real views of what's good for the American people, not based on who gets credit.

Submitted by MarkH (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 8:00 PM PST.

....aaaaaaaaand scene.

Posted by: Cazart on 01/14/09

This just begs for a longer 'script' and a really kewl title.

BTW, pass me the damn rolls! No, not the Kaiser rolls OR the Crescent rolls.

Submitted by Luther (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 8:57 PM PST.

And the reason is that they wouldn't have confidence in Bush or McCain to be surrounded by liberal ideas without being deeply influenced by them.
Bush is a liberal. He is an Evangelical Christian, but otherwise very liberal, whether it be on spending, ruining education by inserting another layer of federal bureaucracy, affirmative action (hiring of incompetent minorities Rice and Gonzales, Rice being a twofer as a woman--the highest advancement of incompetents on the basis of skin and sex EVER), copying Dem Woodie Wilson on making the world safe for democracy, chamberpot immigration--you name it--Bush is one of yours, not one of ours.

Submitted by jerry (not verified) on Wed Jan. 14, 2009 9:33 PM PST.

I'm afraid to ask, but what is chamberpot immigration?

Submitted by Robert Waldmann (not verified) on Thu Jan. 15, 2009 5:47 AM PST.

Chait's right I think. I bet right wingers have never gotten over the shock of Reagan decided to aim for 0 nuclear weapons after a chat with Gorbachev.

However, there are other factors involved. For one thing, wingers would go ballistic, because that is what they do -- many of them can't phrase coherent arguments so they scream. Also many are spoiled brat egomaniacs who wouldn't forgive McCain for talking to anyone but them.

I'd guess that Will and Brooks wouldn't have gone ballistic. Kristol maybe, and, well, when has Krauthammer ever not gone ballistic ?

Submitted by rea (not verified) on Thu Jan. 15, 2009 8:24 AM PST.

And it came to pass, as Jesus sat at meat in the house, behold, many publicans and sinners came and sat down with him and his disciples.

And when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners?

But when Jesus heard that, he said unto them, They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick.

;)

Submitted by skippy (not verified) on Thu Jan. 15, 2009 9:11 AM PST.

a "smart cookie"? that's racist!! :-p

posted by: ramki on 01/14/09 at 2:18 pm

...and never blow his cookies...

posted by: slanted tom on 01/14/09 at 4:16 pm

that's racist and sexist!

Submitted by John Hansen (not verified) on Thu Jan. 15, 2009 2:34 PM PST.

Bush went to many meetings with a room full of liberals who are biased against him. They called them press conferences.

Submitted by Godless Heathen (not verified) on Thu Jan. 15, 2009 5:46 PM PST.

Yeah, and for suffering through 44 of those evil meetings, he rewarded himself with 76 vacations (not days of vacation, individual vacations). Somehow, I'm not losing any sleep for the man.