“The same is true with AIG,” he said. “It was the right thing to do to step in. Here’s the problem. It’s almost like they’ve got — they’ve got a bomb strapped to them and they’ve got their hand on the trigger. You don’t want them to blow up. But you’ve got to kind of talk them, ease that finger off the trigger.”Let's parse this statement a bit, shall we? President Obama says that AIG has a "bomb strapped to them and they've got their hand on the trigger." So they are terrorists, then? And the implication here is that the honchos at AIG willfully built a metaphorical bomb, strapped it to themselves and are now contemplating whether or not to pull the trigger. In other words, one could reasonably believe that the President of the United States is comparing the management of AIG to a terrorist organization. Wow.
And then let's look at the last part: "But you've got to kind of talk them, ease that finger off the trigger." If the AIG executives are the equivalent of suicide bombers, what on earth would you say to them? What sort of talking points are available for discussions with suicide bombers?
It would be desirable if Barack Obama would understand that he is the President of the United States and that when he speaks, each word has tremendous import. If I didn't know better, I'd be thinking that the President of the United States is a deeply irresponsible man. Trouble is, I don't know better.
Somewhere in Juneau, Sarah Palin sits in her office and laughs quietly to herself about all this.
3 comments:
Or one could reasonably interpret the president's metaphor as a statement about possible self-destruction. He didn't say they had a bomb strapped to their back and were moving to a public place with loads of innocent citizens around. Therefore, he wasn't making out AIG to be terrorists, or suicide bombers specifically. There's a difference in intent.
Anywho, I'm not going to argue whether this is a careless statement, but I do (respecfully!) believe you are reaching a little.
Also, Sarah Palin gave us loads of idiotic statements in a matter of merely three months; it's to her benefit that she's not in the national spotlight having her statements picked apart - and DEFINITELY to our benefit (as long as it graciously lasts).
Respectfully, Amanda, I would say that if a person were negotiating with someone with a bomb strapped to his (or her) back, that would certainly mean the public was about. And since the entirety of the AIG bailout centers on the notion that if the bailout didn't happen, many innocent people would be hurt, I don't think I'm reaching at all. And if I'm reaching, then the Christian Science Monitor (not exactly a conservative bastion) is reaching, too, because they reached the same conclusion.
The bombing will begin in five minutes.
Post a Comment