President Obama, in his interview with Fox’s Bill O’Reilly before the Super Bowl denied that he’s moving to the center: "I haven't -- I didn't move to... I'm the same guy," he said. He explained, "Over the first two years of my presidency, we had a complete disaster. Right? We had a complete crisis. The financial markets were breaking down. We were slipping into a Great Depression. And we had to take a bunch of extraordinary steps in order to make sure that the economy was growing again, which it is now, growing. Making sure that the private sector was creating jobs again. It's now doing that."
The AP tees up Obama’s speech at the U.S. Chamber. “After two years of vociferous conflict over health care and financial regulations, the two have entered into something of a detente. President Barack Obama has scheduled a speech Monday at the Chamber, a first for him. Not four months ago, he had attacked the huge, Republican-leaning trade organization for failing to disclose donors to its $32 million congressional political campaign, ‘Their lips are sealed,’ Obama said at the time, ‘but the floodgates are open.’”
“Their bitter fights overshadowed areas of solid agreement, including the Chamber's support of Obama's 2009 economic stimulus plan and the bailout of General Motors and Chrysler. Obama played a populist hand, referring to bankers as "fat cats," rebuking corporate lobbyists and casting the insurance industry as an antagonist in the health care debate.”
The New York Times: "The budget that President Obama will release next week reflects scores of 'tough calls' that cut deeply into programs that the president supports, in keeping with his proposed five-year freeze on a broad category of domestic spending, according to the administration’s budget director. In an Op-Ed article in The New York Times on Sunday, the director, Jacob J. Lew, gives three examples of those calls: proposed cuts for programs that support community organizers, a job the president once held; that clean the Great Lakes; and that finance community development. Together, they would save $775 million."
The Boston Globe profiles Elizabeth Warren and her challenges as head of the new consumer protection agency, especially with the administration’s shift in tone toward big business: “The Obama administration has shifted from bashing Wall Street ‘fat cats’ to courting some of the same groups that fiercely opposed Warren and her agency. That has left Warren with a pair of challenges: being a tough industry watchdog in what is now characterized as a business-friendly administration and trying to quickly assemble and manage an agency when her skills are rooted in the proverbial ivory tower at Harvard Yard. ‘I know there are plenty of people with a handful of rocks — people just like me in my former life as an academic — watching this consumer agency every step of the way,’ Warren said.”
Turning to the situation in Egypt… “After days of efforts to nudge Mubarak off the stage, if not necessarily out the door, the White House was compelled to shift its approach last week after both the Egyptian president and his top aides made clear that he intends to stay,” the Washington Post says. “Mubarak's defiance was followed by a convulsion of violence in Cairo, then a period of hopeful calm as progress toward negotiations appeared to gain momentum, then renewed uncertainty as that effort faltered while Clinton flew. With the Muslim Brotherhood's agreement Sunday to enter talks with Mubarak's newly appointed Vice President Omar Suleiman, optimism has reasserted itself.”
More: “While acknowledging that violence could erupt again, U.S. officials and Middle East experts credited the administration with establishing useful parameters - in essence, that the government must avoid violence and that Suleiman and the opposition must talk, and quickly - that have helped to prevent, for now, the country's slide into anarchy.”
The New York Times zeroes in on Mubarak. "The question of whether Mr. Mubarak will yield power willingly — and how and under what timetable he might do so — are driving the Obama administration’s national security team to assess and reassess their strategy in dealing with him. It is being watched intently by the antigovernment protesters in Cairo, much of the Arab world and even by members of his own government."


Why is the "liberal media" pushing this whole notion that the president has, or has to, move to the mythical middle? I have yet to hear any pundit ask Boehner or McConnell if they are going to move to the middle, the not so subtle message is that republicans already represent the center. And that is a total crock.
Excellent question, Patrick.
What exactly is the Middle?
The only reason the President appears to be in the middle is that the Republicans have moved to the left fringe and the Tea Party is trying to drag them even further right.
O'Reilly kept this interview very simple. Probably because of the IQ of his audience. He looked disgusted throughout the interview while Obama looked relaxed and in his game. O'Reilly questions were all about his viewers not America. He did an inustice to the rest of us watching but why am I not surprised. It was a waste of time for Fox because Obama took the high road and kept it there in a friendly manner. O'Reilly....You suck at interviews!
The first of many probable comments about the O'Reilly interview. The libbienuts should be out in force today commenting as per the above. Obama - good; O'Reilly - bad.
I do agree with the one Obama comment: "I haven't -- I didn't move to... I'm the same guy,". He is the same community organizer; and to many, he has lost creditability in his statements.
Yeah, he's the same lying sack of crap he's always been. It's clear that he's clueless about everything it takes to GOVERN, which is something he is absolutely horrible at. He has no credibility. Nor does he speak for the moderates of this country who are always the ones who end up paying for these hairbrained schemes this so-called Harvard grad comes up with. He should be impeached.
bethcat and safecracker,
You have nothing to add that is of any value. You should go post on Fox. Oh wait....I forgot. You are paid trolls to post on liberal leaning blogs. Sorry...Keep up the "pretty wasteful use of space" work you do!
AnaBanana,
Are you stating by your post that this site is devoted only to opinions of a liberal persuation? Political discussion that differs from your opinion is wrong and should be stimmied from this site - only pat-on-the-back comments to further make libbienuts feel warm and fuzzy? What a crock - I am not impressed with you or your comments. But I respect your right to make them, irregardless of your dictitorial thoughts on who should post and where.
You my friend, are an ass with the previous comment. Got off your med there Libbienut? AnaBanana, your statements don't impress me.
O reilly is a scumbag who does not give the president a chance to answer a sentence without inturrupting him if it had of been me i woild have got up a sean how hard i could have slapped Oreilly for not giving me time to answer his question . but President has more class than I do and he has more class in his little pinkie rthan O'rielly has in his whole body . If i was president Obama I would never give FOX an interview again . they on Fox are dierepestful of the President and should be a shamed . like I said O'reilly is a scumbag .as is all of the people on Fox .
Oreilly didn't give the president a chance to answer. he is so disrespectful. HE acted like he was the President . think God Oreilly is just a newsman on Fox if you want to call it news
Obama has never been "the same guy" twice in any year. He is whatever he needs to be to capitalize on whatever politically ambitious opportunity is in his sight. He stands for nothing, has no politifal values, and while he talks a good game, he does only that which reinforces his chances for re-election. This is too bad. His legacy? First half-black President with no resume.
Tellsit: he does have a resume: Community Organizer, Professor - Constitutional Studies, Greed & Corruption Studies - Chicago, IL.
Yep, you find that he stands for nothing, has no values and doesn't even talk a good game. He has lost his character to many, except his cheerleaders on the site.
safecracker you are also a scumbag you should be between the legs of Oreilly
what is wrong or what has Obama done wrong? I bet you can't tell me .
Shrum,
From this scumbag (haven't heard that discriptive since gradeschool), Obama hasn't done much right. That is the question. What has your man done correctly shrum?
And who will run against him for the Dem nomination shrum?
President Obama has been the same guy. His number one concern is "what is best for the American people...what do they need?" This overriding concern can look differently over the year...sometimes we need him to focus on the economy/jobs. Sometimes we need for him to focus on foreign policy or the oil spill.
Obama to the Chamber of Commerce: 'We can and must work together'"
Interpretation:
Obama:"It's proven that I've been a real incompetent idiot for previously slamming the hell out of the Chamber of Commerce... and now, since I haven't produced any jobs and have been losing support everywhere I turn.... I'll say and do ANYTHING to get back in the good graces of the Chamber, including sucking up.... because the 2012 elections are right around the corner...... (do you think anybody will remember the previous hatred I created toward the Chamber and the complete 180 I'm now trying to do?)
And who will the Dems run against President Barry in this election cycle? Does Barry have the stuff the libbienuts are looking for in their president?
I know, since they buy-into Al Gore, perhaps they will bring him out again.
yes he is their man and he will win . you should ask your shelf who will the GOP run?
GO Obama for President in 2012
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA........what does he have to sell this time around, and will the country be buying again?