Again, with the hypocracy.

Who says the speach was a "failure"
other than people who wanted it to be one, or who didn't
understand the complex sentences and multi-syllabic words?

I guess I refer to it as a failed speech because it has not been well received by his target audience, the American people; and by all acounts, the evidence stands with me.  Not only was the speech nearly universally panned in both print and broadcast media, but it enjoyed, at best, a tepid reception from the general public.  Below are two independent trackings of daily presidential approval.  Of course an expected variation exists between the two over-all approval numbers, but a unifying trend is revealed in the unanamous downward movement of the President's numbers since he spoke to us on tuesday night.  And considering that a President customarily receives an approval bump subsequent to giving a major speech, it would have damaging for his numbers to simply remain static, but devistating for them to drop.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Job-Approval- Center.aspx

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obam a_administration/obama_approval_index_history

In addition, if the goal of the speech was to reach as many people as possible, it failed there too.

http://dailycaller.com/2010/06/16/nielsen-32m-viewers-saw-ob amas-gulf-oil-speech/

Also, you're right that I don't put much stock in the content of any message delivered by Chris Matthews, but one has to be willfully blind in order to not assign significance to the harshness of the critisizm comming from one man who shares an ideology with another man.  And that, is exactly why the line Matthews so harshly panned received such prominence in the article I originally posted.  Especially concidering the following:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjkgMiVKMog&feature=relat ed

Guys,

I do apologise for the way my previous post came across, but in the media (not just the Daily Mail) there is a feeling Obama's comments were aimed at Britain in general.

I 100% agree that BP should be held liable for this disaster, and should pay a heavy price. I will in no way stand up for oil companies as they are the biggest "robber barons" out there.

I believe Britain has stood firm (rightly and wrongly at times) with America, and for that the President should choose his words more wisely.

Greg

Go back and gather up some information - say, Presidental Approval for example - dating back a few years - and get polls done by Zogby and Gallup and Rasmussen, and then compare those to other pollers and note the funny result you'll find:

Zogby, Rasmussen and Gallup trend right.

The people they poll are right leaning - their focus groups are not correctly defined, their questions are leading and their funding comes from right wing organizations.

Without that knowledge, I'm sure you THOUGHT that the people were on your side, but I still rest firmly in my knowledge that A) most people didn't give a shit about the speach and of those who watched it 1)some really couldn't wrap their brains around the words and others 2) had preconcieved notions going in, good and bad.

I stand by my thesis. And I call yours ill-founded.

Zogby, Rasmussen and Gallup trend right.

Sure.  We can have this argument if you want.  We can even go to wikipedia and copy and paste our arguments to save ourselves time, if you want.

Or, we could go back to the point in the discussion when your premis used to be that the President's speech was not actually a failure.  Because I need to know, Mike, do you really, truly and honestly believe it to be anything other?  And if so, what is your evidence?  And if so, how do you account for the massive media feeding frenzy we're currently witnessing?

Because until you give me a little something to go by, if you ask me to believe, despite all evidence to the contrary, that the speech was not a failure, you might as well ask me to believe that a man can be a Libertarian despite consistent Republican votes.  If it walks like a duck, Mike. 

OH SNAP!!

William, I've been extremely critical of the President and of his policies in the past.  I've disagreed with him on content.  That's because I'm a conservative and he's a liberal.  Our ideologies differ very sharply, but I don't recall ever refering to any of his past speeches as failures.

Clearly this one was.