By GottaLaff
(Unrelated photo
via)
Yesterday
I posted about President Obama (with audio) following up-- unsolicited-- on a (ridiculous) question by the
New York Times about whether he was a socialist. Yes, that question.
But here's what isn't ridiculous: Our very smart, very savvy prez isn't just reaching out to Congress, or red states, or Goldendoodles.
He's reaching out to the very same conservative media that so often misquotes, disagrees, or outright bashes him:
“I’ve had more unsolicited offers for participation from the Obama people in 45 days than in the last eight years from Bush,” said [Andrew Rosenthal, The Times’ editorial page director].
Rosenthal said the Obama administration’s approach is consistent with the one the Obama campaign used, and for a reason: It worked. Citing an example, he said that an Obama campaign aide succeeded in convincing him back in July — before an editorial ran — that Obama had not, in fact, reversed his position on a controversial D.C. handgun ban.
“With columnists and editorial writers,” Rosenthal said, “I think the theory is that you can actually have an impact.”
Washington Post editorial page editor Fred Hiatt said in an e-mail that the Obama team has been “open and responsive” to requests from The Post’s editorial writers. Hiatt said that helps The Post “produce smarter and more knowledgeable editorials.”
“My general view is, the more exchange of views, the better,” Hiatt added. “I welcome any outreach from the White House to my columnists or editorial board.” [...]
In an interview, [David] Brooks said that Obama’s people respond quickly to columns with which they find fault — but that, in doing so, they refrain from “personal insults,” opting for a “very nice, very evidence-based” approach instead.
The Obama outreach effort is different than Bush’s in part because the previous administration “only reached out to people who automatically agreed with them.” [...]
Rosenthal wondered if the Bush team had the kind of contact with The Wall Street Journal editorial board that the Obama team does now. WSJ editorial page editor Paul Gigot declined comment, but Tony Blankley — who ran The Washington Times’ conservative editorial page during the bulk of Bush’s tenure — suggested that it probably wasn’t so.
Although Blankley said he spoke regularly with senior Bush administration officials, many of whom he’d known for years, he said the Bush press team’s outreach was not as “aggressive in putting out useful things or complaining about editorials they didn’t like” as Obama’s is.
Part of the reason for that, says Chicago Tribune columnist Clarence Page, is that, like former President Bill Clinton, Obama “likes this sort of thing — the exchange with pundits.” [...]
[The Post's Kathleen] Parker, a conservative who clashed with Republicans over the Sarah Palin nomination, wrote a very personal account of the trip for The Daily Beast. There, she talked about the “adorable” Obama daughters and the president’s calm nature. “If you cut Obama open,” she said, “you’d find a little Buddha sitting inside, smiling.”
The personal touch is important, Dionne said, because “human beings, being who we are, it’s probably harder to eviscerate someone who you’ve sat down with and decided isn’t an evil person.”
Then why didn't they eviscerate Bush?
.jpg)
