Robert Redford on CNN: Obama is not up to the challenge of leading this country

[Bullitt]

@Frylock

So what were exactly the words he used? And how reliable is Redford’s opinion about Obama’s abilities as an indicator of Obama’s abilities?

See below, and I see that you might not disagree that Redford might have said that. As far as Redford being a reliable indicator, that’s for others to judge.

Again, see my reply below.

[Bullitt]

@dropzone

Redford is an actor and his opinions are worth about as much as yours and mine.

Therefore, you allow for the possibility that Redford said that. See my reply below where I point to where he does that.

[Bullitt]

@Thudlow_Boink

Obama may not be up to the challenge of leading this country, but who is? I can’t remember the last Presidential candidate who I was reasonably confident was up to the challenge of the Presidency.

So, you agree with Redford then.

[Bullitt]

@RTFirefly

A lot of centrist commentators make it sound as if only Obama would “show leadership” in some unclear fashion, or alternatively “reach across the aisle,” a lot of our problems could be resolved. It’s quite possible that Redford has absorbed a bunch of that bullshit.

But Obama spent the first three years of his Presidency trying to “reach across the aisle,” and only got mugged for his efforts. And the sharp interparty divisions we’ve got are beyond anyone’s ability to overcome by “showing leadership.”

If the Dems can keep their 2014 Senate losses down to 2-3 seats, and Hillary has a good year in 2016, she just might have a Dem Congress with a filibuster-proof Senate majority. That’s probably the next time a Democratic President can get anything remotely controversial through Congress. And it’s got nothing to do with whether Obama is up to the job or not.

Oh it most certainly does have something to do with it. Being an effective leader (as opposed to trying hard at it) means one can rally support for one’s initiatives and build consensus for them, among friend and foe. Consensus, not unanimity.

[Bullitt]

@garygnu

Most of the time when I hear such an opinion, it really means, “Obama wants things different than I do.” It’s funny, he’s even presented his opposition’s own plan back to them and they still oppose it.

If so, then clearly he’s a weak leader who’s not up to the task of leading this country. You agree with Redford.

[Bullitt]

@filmore

I would sort of agree. While he is the president, he doesn’t seem very presidential. He doesn’t seem to have a lot of natural charisma or leadership skills. He seems like a pretty bland person. His speeches are a bit boring and go on too long. Fortunately, he seems to look at all the facts when making a decision and tries to do what he thinks is best.

Redford is a very engaging actor. It’s not just that he says his lines so well or hits his marks perfectly. Something about the way he delivers his performance creates an emotional connection with the audience. I would say that Obama does not create that sort of connection with the people. A president should have that ability because he is trying to get a nation to follow his vision.

The Republicans often bring this up, as if it means they should have won the election. That is hardly the case. I will take any reasonably competent Democrat over any Republican at this point. There is way too much derp policy in the Republican party and they all seem to vote as one block. It doesn’t matter how charismatic and brilliant a Republican is if all he does is vote along party lines. So even if the perfect Democrat is not running, I don’t care. At least he’s not a Republican. Hopefully the R’s can turn it around so I feel like I’m picking between two candidates again.

Mostly agree, and I’ll add that Obama is very charismatic, intelligent, and good at heart.

And, I agree that the Republicans lost, plain and simple. There’s no woulda, coulda, shoulda. And yeah, the Rs need to turn it around so that we have two real people to choose from.

[Bullitt]

@Esox_Lucius

Never mind, everybody. Here’s a link to the interview. The political stuff begins at 2:00.

Yeah, those aren’t the words he used, nor is it in any way an accurate paraphrasing. This is what he said:

“When you have a system that’s supposed to serve the public good by being bipartisan–cause that’s the point of it all, bipartisanship is meant to serve the public good. When you have one half whose only motive is to destroy the motives of the president of the United States, then you have a diseased system. And I don’t think that’s his fault. I think it just makes his job tougher.”

He goes on to compare the bipartisanship of the Watergate hearings to the utter lack of bipartisanship today. Not a thing about Obama not being up to the challenge of leading the country. So where did you get that?

You miss a key part. See below.

My paraphrasing was spot-on.

[Bullitt]

@Belowjob2.0

Yeah, he’s got no shot at being reelected now!

But seriously, what you posted is NOT an accurate paraphrasing. After all this time, why do you even bother playing these games?

Games? I’m only relating what Redford said.

Again, see below and my paraphrasing was spot-on.

[Gyrate]

@echo7tango

If so, then clearly he’s a weak leader who’s not up to the task of leading this country. You agree with Redford.

That’s not what Redford said at all. There’s a fundamental difference between “Obama can’t govern” and “This country is ungovernable” even if the outcome is the same.

[Bullitt]

@Kolak_of_Twilo

raises hand

Made it up?

Imagined it?

Had one of the lizard people whisper it in his ear?

Read below. And, just what are lizard people? Is that a D&D reference?

[Bullitt]

@TimeWinder

For future reference, while “flammable” and “inflammable” mean the same thing, the same is not true for “accurate” and “inaccurate.” Nor, for that matter does “accurate” mean “incredibly deceptive strawman.”

Glad I could clear that up for you.

Did you even watch the interview?

[Gyrate]

@echo7tango

Read below. And, just what are lizard people? Is that a D&D reference?

David Icke.

[Bullitt]

@Esox_Lucius

All of the above, plus “pulled it out of his ass and stunk the place up”.

Funny. Actually I pulled it out of Redford’s own words.

[Bullitt]

@Gyrate

That’s not what Redford said at all. There’s a fundamental difference between “Obama can’t govern” and “This country is ungovernable” even if the outcome is the same.

Therefore we don’t have a leader strong enough, and adept enough, to do the job.

That’s what Redford said.

[Bullitt]

Okay, so here it is. Again, the transcript is here (thanks to those who found and provided that above): CNN.com - Transcripts

The paraphrasing is of part of Redford’s conclusions and not his entire message. It is accurate.

The two parts where Redford says that Obama is not up to the challenge of leading this country are these. Emphases mine.

Well, first of all, I think he’s a good human being. That’s, I think, clear. He’s a humanitarian at heart, and that’s good. He’s trying to manage an extremely difficult situation. I mean, it’s – it’s almost too much for one person.

And…

But I think, for Obama, I think he can’t do what he –

One of Redford’s conclusion is that Obama is not up to the challenge of leading this country. Put another way, he says – Oh, the poor guy, he’s in over his head. But hey, he is a nice guy.

Those above who pasted the transcript missed some relevant parts. The entire Obama-related transcript context follows.

(Again, emphases mine)

STELTER: I’m sorry to say I missed Sundance last year because I was trying to go to the inauguration, the second inauguration for President Obama.

REDFORD: Were you? Well, a lot of people left here to go there.

STELTER: Did they?

REDFORD: Yeah, yeah.

STELTER: I wonder how you feel now that it’s been a year into his second term. You’ve been such a big supporter of his. How do you feel he’s doing?

REDFORD: Well, first of all, I think he’s a good human being. That’s, I think, clear. He’s a humanitarian at heart, and that’s good. He’s trying to manage an extremely difficult situation. I mean, it’s – it’s almost too much for one person. But when you have a system that’s supposed to serve the public good by being bipartisan – because that’s the point of it all. Bipartisanship was meant to serve the public good.

When you have one half whose only motive is to destroy the motives of the president of the United States, then you have a diseased system. And I don’t think that’s his fault. I think it just makes his job tougher.

STELTER: It sounds like you see disease when you look at Washington politics.

REDFORD: I do. I see disease in – inside the Beltway. But, you know, while you’re on it, we – we spoke a while back on “All the President’s Men Revisited.” There’s a moment in that film I’d like to point out that illustrates my point, which is remember the hearings, the Watergate hearings? And we have some archival footage in there where you had the panel, Sam Ervin, Sam (inaudible) – you had all these guys, and you have the senator from Tennessee, and he was conservative; he was a republican. You had Republicans and Democrats on this panel. And what you got out of it was how hard all of them were working together to get to the truth of something.

And I thought, I’m seeing something we don’t see today, bipartisanship, working together to get to the truth for the public good.

STELTER: Are there particular disappointments you feel in President Obama after the first year of his second term?

I ask because we had that big letter come out from 18 environmental groups that were breaking from the president recently and saying they didn’t support his current strategy toward environmental…

REDFORD: Well, obviously I’m prejudiced. If there’s a prejudice, it’s pretty clear. I favor the environment. I don’t know how you can – I don’t know how a person could bring a child into the world without thinking about what we’re going to give them that should be preserved or give them so they have something to work with.

And I think some of the industries of old that made this country strong and great have now turned the other way; they don’t serve us anymore because there’s new technologies that are cleaner and, if they were used, would be a better country for our young people to step into. And yet you have the powers that be running the show. And then there you have it, same old same old. And to me, that’s unhealthy.

But I think, for Obama, I think he can’t do what he – if he can’t get bipartisanship to work with, then that’s a tough one.

In terms of the environment, I’m very, very pro the environment, obviously. And I think, if you have somebody that has to balance both sides of the equation and one of the sides is gas and oil, coal, which I think are destructive to the environment, but they have to be balanced because of all the money they bring into the political equation, you’ve got a difficult row to hoe. And I think that’s the row he’s trying to hoe, and I think that’s tough.

Clearly, Redford believes Obama is not up to the challenge of leading this country. That wasn’t his main message, but it is one of them.

I don’t think there’s much else to say. Have a nice day folks.

[MsWhatsit]

Why do you care? Why does anybody care? Some random actor gave his opinion about the president. This is news? This warrants a thread?

[JRDelirious]

Er, technical note: OP, in the future do you mind learning to multi-quote, rather than do several posts all with the same exact answer? That started to grate.

Oh, and BTW I (a) do not agree with your conclusion on Redford’s answer and (b) get more of a feeling that Redford’s trying to say nobody could handle this, and I disagree with THAT. But FWIW I did not care about Hollywood’s opinion of Barack pro or con all the way back in 08 when so why should I start caring for it now?

[interface2x]

@PastTense

3. Obamacare. He could have compromised with the Republicans to get some significant improvements over the status quo.

There were 160 republican amendments to the bill. How many would it take to show actual “compromise”?

[Gyrate]

@echo7tango

Clearly, Redford believes Obama is not up to the challenge of leading this country. That wasn’t his main message, but it is one of them.

I don’t think there’s much else to say. Have a nice day folks.

Really? You put all that effort into that desperately pathetic bit of spin? “Redford says no one can govern the country, therefore he’s saying that Obama can’t do his job, therefore Obama suXX0r5 LOL”? You rephrase, and then rephrase your rephrase, and then claim victory?

I really don’t understand why you bothered. You’ve fooled no one here. I mean, even if Redford had expressed a negative opinion of Obama - which he hasn’t specifically - what difference does it make?

[Knorf]

@echo7tango

Not exactly the words he used, but that is an accurate paraphrasing of what he said.

Not even slightly.