Today, I, COkdub am handing out the Ed Henry Award to Chip Reid from CBS news.
For those of you who don't know about the Ed Henry Award, it was from an awesome comment by That Anonymous Guy in Muzikal203's diary Getting Smacked Down By the POTUS. . . Priceless :
Presented to the reporter who asks the dipshittiest comment at any given Obama press conference.
Major Garrett, Chip Reid and Chuck Todd might've asked some dipshit questions during that presser, but it was Ed Henry who turned public obtuseness into an art.
Now, if any one of them writes a 500-word egotistical article on their public smackdown by the prez, I might then consider 'em in Henry's league.
Chip Reid on Tuesday night afternoon (thanks Muzikal!):
THE PRESIDENT: Chip.
Q: Thank you, Mr. President. Following up on Major's question, some republicans on Capitol Hill -- John McCain and Lindsey Graham, for example -- have said that up to this point, your response on Iran has been timid and weak. Today, it sounded a lot stronger. It sounded like the kind of speech John McCain has been urging you to give, saying that those who stand up for justice are always on the right side of history, referring to an iron fist in Iran -- "deplore," "appalled," "outraged." Were you influenced at all by John McCain and Lindsey Graham accusing you of being timid and weak?
THE PRESIDENT: What do you think? (Laughter.) Look, the -- I think John McCain has genuine passion about many of these international issues, and I think that all of us share a belief that we want justice to prevail. But only I'm the President of the United States, and I've got responsibilities in making certain that we are continually advancing our national security interests and that we are not used as a tool to be exploited by other countries.
I mean, you guys must have seen the reports. They've got some of the comments that I've made being mistranslated in Iran, suggesting that I'm telling rioters to go out and riot some more. There are reports suggesting that the CIA is behind all this -- all of which are patently false. But it gives you a sense of the narrative that the Iranian government would love to play into. So the -- members of Congress, they've got their constitutional duties, and I'm sure they will carry them out in the way that they think is appropriate. I'm President of the United States, and I'll carry out my duties as I think are appropriate. All right?
Q: By speaking so strongly today, aren't you giving the leadership in Iran the fodder to make those arguments that it is about the United States?
THE PRESIDENT: Look, I mean, I think that -- we can parse this as much as we want. I think if you look at the statements that I've made, they've been very consistent. I just made a statement on Saturday in which we said we deplore the violence. And so I think that in the hothouse of Washington, there may be all kinds of stuff going back and forth in terms of Republican critics versus the administration. That's not what is relevant to the Iranian people. What's relevant to them right now is, are they going to have their voices heard?
And, frankly, a lot of them aren't paying a lot of attention to what's being said on Capitol Hill, and probably aren't spending a lot of time thinking about what's being said here. They're trying to figure out how can they make sure justice is served in Iran.
Shorter Chip Reid:
You should listen to John McCain. Why aren't you singing "Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" Mr. President?
and Chip Reid's question today?
Chip.
Q Ever since the President toughened his language a few days ago, two things have happened -- maybe more than two, but at least two. One is that the dissent has been all but crushed. So is he powerless to affect the situation there? And second, Ahmadinejad has attempted to use his words as exactly the kind of foil and political football that the President wanted to avoid. So, number one, is the President powerless there; and number two, did he give them the kind of ammunition that he was trying to avoid giving?
MR. GIBBS: No. Interesting 180 on your earlier question from earlier in the week.
Q Times change.
MR. GIBBS: Yes, apparently. Look, I think the international community continues to condemn what is going on in Iran. I think if you asked the Iranian regime where they are right now and where they sit and whether they think they're in good stead and in control of that country, I think you'll in a moment of honesty get a far different answer. The President, again, has responded forcefully from the very moment of the elections, the first day that you all asked him questions in the Oval Office about violence that might happen and violence that at that point had already happened.
I think, again, what you've seen from Ahmadinejad is probably right out of the regime's playbook. They were going to -- in many ways, they were going to try to do this regardless of what we said. I think the President, in many ways, disposed of Mr. Ahmadinejad's language from the past couple of days at the press avail earlier. I think he has done what he needs to do to ensure that he doesn't become a foil by the regime, and I think that's been reported by many of your outlets from people believing that in Iran.
Q Do you think that his more forceful presentation, his more forceful words, have had a direct effect on the situation in Iran for the better?
MR. GIBBS: Well, I think the President -- the President spoke out forcefully against violence from the very beginning. I think those are universal principles that he and many throughout the world community uphold. And he will continue, as they discussed it -- as he discussed it with Chancellor Merkel, and as the G8 has done, continue to speak out on this.
Geeez... talk about an about-face. Four days ago, the adminstration and particularly the President weren't being harsh enough with Iran and now they're being too harsh? Which is it?