Tag Archives: Obama

Aug 26

The Main Event

Posted on by

BUSH-BOXING_s1-2741 Obama boxing1 Jim Lampley: ‘Good evening HBO fight fans and  welcome to what’s already being called the communications fight of the century, if not the millennium. We’re here at the Mandalay Bay Hotel & Resort in Las Vegas for the long-anticipated and completely over-hyped World Heavyweight Communications Championship bout between defending champion Barack ‘The One’ Obama and the challenger, former President George W. ‘The Decider’ Bush.

As fight fans know, this special, one-round bout is being co-sponsored by MSNBC and Fox News, and the outcome will be determined by three Supreme Court justices sitting here at ringside.

As always, I’m joined by longtime boxing analyst, Larry Merchant, as well as a very special guest, Former President William Jefferson Clinton. Larry, Mr. President, thanks for being here.’

Merchant: ‘Jim, I haven’t seen this sort of excitement since March 8, 1971, when Ali and Frazier squared off for the first of their three classic bouts. Whether this contest will live up to the drama of that one remains to be seen.’

Clinton: ‘That’s funny, Larry. This sort of frenzy reminds me of my impeachment trial way back when. It’s really got something for everyone.’

Lampley: ‘It sure does, Mr. President. To begin with, who would have guessed just 18 months ago that The Decider would be entering the ring against The One to determine which of the two men is the better communicator? But, since being elected, Obama has made every mistake in the communications handbook, so here we are.’

Merchant: ‘For W, it’s a rags-to-riches story worthy of Cinderella Man, Jim.’

Lampley: ‘It sure is. Because as even the least literate boxing and communications fan knows, W was routinely pilloried for his verbal flubs and guffaws, and ridiculed as perhaps the least literate president in American history.’

Clinton: ‘I’d like to think that William Henry Harrison said more substantive things in his brief one-month stint than W did in his eight years, Jim.’

Lampley: ‘Be that as it may, Mr. President. Obama’s flip-flopping miscues are making many right-wing pundits wax poetic about W’s sophomoric, yet direct, communications style. Some are even suggesting W is the better communicator of the two. Well, that will be decided in the ring in just a matter of seconds. So, let’s go up to Michael Buffer now for the official introductions…’

Buffer: ‘Good evening to the thousands of communications fight fans in attendance here and the millions watching on TV around the world and on The Armed Forces Network. Now, ladies and gentlemen let’s get ready to RUMBLLLLLE! First, the challenger, fighting out of the red corner and hailing from Crawford, Texas, via Kennebunkport, Maine. He tips the scale at a lean and mean 185 pounds, and is wearing all-white trunks with bald eagles on either side. Ladies and the gentlemen, the 43rd president of the United States, George W. ‘The Decider’ Bush! And, in the blue corner, wearing the requisite red, white and blue trunks, tipping the scales at a tight and taut 166 pounds, and coming to us from our nation’s capitol, via Chicago and Honolulu, the defending heavyweight communications champion of the world, President Barack ‘the One’ Obama!’

Lampley: The two men are coming to the center of the ring now for their instructions from referee Katie Couric. Say, is that yet another new hairdo on Katie, Mr. President?’

Clinton: ‘It was all mussed up the last time I saw it. Oops. Wait. Hold on, I did not have sex with that woman!’

Merchant: ‘Jim, both fighters are in amazing shape.’

Lampley: ‘Yup. W’s been doing extra mountain biking on his ranch, while the president’s been playing lots of pick-up round ball games on the White House basketball court. And, there’s the opening bell for this special, one-round fight.’

Merchant: ‘Obama’s off to a great start.’

Clinton: ‘No question. He’s very focused on change. That’s confusing W. And, he’s using that very same ‘change’ punch that floored Hillary on more than one occasion. He looks sharp. Hey, get a load of that blond in section C!’

Lampley: ‘Careful, Mr. President. Man, this place is lousy with Presidents. Wait, there’s been a palpable change. Just like that, Obama seems to be back pedaling?  He looks confused. Larry?’

Merchant: ‘Obama’s confused all right. He’s trying to say do everything at once. There’s his health care backhand. Easily deflected. And, there’s his education overhand. Air ball. And, he just missed badly with his so-called Wall Street wacker. And what’s going on with his Iraq drawdown and Afghani build-up? Nothing is working for the sitting President.’

Lampley: ‘Simultaneously, W continues to throw the same, direct, methodical punch time and again. That’s the punch that he affectionately nicknames his “Yer either fer me or agin me” left. It’s hitting its mark, to be sure.’

Merchant: ‘That last shot staggered Obama. Jim, he looks hurt!’

Lampley: ‘Down goes Obama! Down goes Obama! Down goes Obama!’

Clinton: ‘I feel his pain.’

Merchant: ‘Obama’s up, but he’s on Queer Street. Could be because he never really addressed the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” military conundrum. Either way, this sure won’t help his approval ratings.’

Lampley: “There’s the bell, which mercifully ends this round and this fight. The decision will go to the judges. But first, let’s turn to our two experts. Larry, Mr. President: ‘Did Obama’s early lead pile up enough points to offset that damaging knockdown by W?’’

Merchant: ‘The onus is always on the challenger to prove to the judges that he’s done enough to win. I don’t think W has done that.’

Clinton: ‘I need to meet someone, Jim. I’ll catch you boys later. Go Obama!’

Lampley: ‘Well, let’s find out. We go now to Michael Buffer in the ring for the official decision…’

Buffer: ‘Ladies and gentlemen, we have a split decision. Judge Rosa Sotomayor scores the fight one to nothing for Obama. Judge Clarence Thomas scores the fight one to nothing for Bush. And, Chief Judge John Roberts scores the right one to nothing for the NEW heavyweight communications champion of the world, George W. Bush!!!!!’

Lampley: A shocking upset to be sure! Let’s go to Larry Merchant in the ring, who is with both fighters.’

Merchant: ‘Ok, Jim. First, President Obama. What went wrong? You were ahead early with your message of change. Then, all hell broke loose.’

Obama: ‘I went with change. But, then I changed change. Changing change changed my chances.’

Merchant: ‘I have no idea what you just said. But, good luck to you. Now to the victor. President Bush. How’d you do it?’

Bush: ‘Smoked him out, just like bin Laden!’

Merchant: ‘But, you never smoked out bin Laden.’

Bush: ‘Doesn’t matter. I’m the decider. Mission accomplished.’

Merchant: ‘Mr. President, would you consider giving President Obama a rematch?’

Bush: ‘Shucks no. I want to take on that feisty momma from Alaska. Now that would be a communications brawl. The English language won’t know what hit it.’

Lampley: ‘All right. There you have it. There you have it. A big George W. Bush upset. Clearly, The One wasn’t the one tonight. Bush now holds the heavyweight title for best Presidential communicator. Regardless of whether he entertains a rematch or takes on the woman who can see Russia from her front porch, be sure to join us next month for the world’s middleweight communications bout. It’ll feature Carly ‘The Confuser’ Fiorini and ‘Big Bad’ Meg Whitman (who’s been known to manhandle friend and foe alike). For Larry Merchant and the missing-in-action former President Bill Clinton, this is Jim Lampley.’

Jul 15

Jobs tonight. Earth tomorrow.

Posted on by

Today's guest post is by Ann Barlow, President, Peppercom West & Director, GreenPepper.

We need jobs now and we need the earth later.  Why can’t the two go together? 
Broc_obama_2

According to an Economix blog earlier this week, green jobs, even with the spotty help they’ve gotten from government and private investment, are growing at 2½ times the rate of the rest of the jobs out there.  With the dire need for jobs and a job-led economic recovery, isn’t this something to build on?  God knows, we have a ton of work to do to become as energy efficient as Europe and even China at this point.  And renewable energy must be integrated into our existing infrastructure if we are to rely on something more advanced than burning the liquid and the rocks we dig out of the ground.  So why in the world can’t we address these two huge needs through one comprehensive, government-led program that will provide tens of thousands of jobs now while building for our future?

Oh, I can hear all of you ‘big government is our enemy’ folks yelling now, “That’s all we need! Another government project funded by the taxpayers!”  You’re not wrong; a wasteful, poorly managed program is the last thing we need.  But look at what can be done when the power of this nation’s government is wielded, power that is supported by a public that puts everyone’s needs ahead of their own personal ones.  Bridges and dams and parks and roads get built.  Power sources and grids.  Think of all of the people who were able to feed, clothe and house their families thanks to FDR’s New Deal, and the legacy they left for generations to come.

I hope this President, who came to power with so much promise for taking on the big problems, can seize this moment, becoming the Architect in Chief of a program that will relieve the suffering felt by so many millions right now while preserving the planet for their descendants. 

Jun 17

If Obama’s lost the New York Times, he’s lost the nation

Posted on by

Watching the evening network newscasts one night in the
midst of the Vietnam War morass,
Obama-tv-460x276 President Lyndon Johnson witnessed a withering
assault on his policies by none other than CBC News anchorman Walter Cronkite.
LBJ sighed, wearily shut off the Oval Office TV set and famously quipped, “If
I’ve lost Cronkite, I’ve lost the nation.” And, sure enough LBJ had lost
the legendary Cronkite and, in turn, the entire nation. He scored poorly in a
few early 1968 Democratic presidential primaries and decided not to run for
re-election.

Now, fast forward to the ides of June, 2010. President
Barack Obama is himself experiencing a later-day LBJ-Cronkite experience. In
the immediate aftermath of Obama’ televised Oval Office address Wednesday night
on the BP oil spill, both the lead Times
editorial as well as the rhetoric of its resident, caustic, left-wing liberal
columnist, Maureen Dowd’s positively savaged ‘The One’s’ indecisiveness.

This is Obama’s Vietnam moment. With Dowd, et al in the role
of Cronkite.  If the President has lost the Times, then he’s most certainly lost the nation. Looking ahead to
2012, and borrowing a phrase from the upcoming Wimbledon Tennis Tournament,
it’s ‘Game. Set. Match’ for Mr. Obama. I can already visualize the January 2013
O’Dwyer’s headline reading, ‘Former President joins Edelman’s public
affairs office. Obama to counsel high-level clients on crisis issues. Joins
endless array of other erstwhile Capitol Hill power brokers to provide senior
counsel.’

So, what went so terribly wrong?

Unlike W. and Cheney, who shot first and asked questions
later, Obama vacillates to a fault. He waits. He ponders. He evaluates. He
fiddles while Rome, or in this case, Rome, Louisiana, burns. Obama’s Oval
Office speech was deemed a rhetoric-pocked, action-lacking failure by left-wind
pundits, And, if Dowd and company are unimpressed, god knows what the likes of
O’Reilly, Limbaugh and that ultimate pit bull, Glenn Beck, are saying (note:
for reason pertaining to my personal health and well-being, I will not watch
Mr. Beck. He not only baits in Josef Goebbels-like ways, he also bears an
uncanny physical resemblance to one of the worst clients in Peppercom history.
Note: think purple).

Like many moderates and liberals, I’d hoped that Barack
Obama’s ascendance signaled a new era in politics. I answered the clarion call
of change and voted for B.O. who, sadly, is literally living up to his initials
and stinking up the place.

The BP oil spill and Gulf disaster are the Teapot Dome and
Credit Mobilier of our era. One can also throw in Watergate, Iran-Contra and
Monica Lewinsky’s beret, for good measure. It’s been building to a slow
crescendo since his swearing in, but Barack Obama has clearly self-destructed
in the past few weeks.

I’m now convinced he’s a one-term President. That said,
who’s waiting in the wings? Weird Al Yankowicz?

The combination of a relentless 24×7, news beast salivating
at the thought of savaging any new candidate, along with the limitless personal
wealth available in the private sector, has scared away America’s most talented
managers. What’s left is  a dog’s breakfast of dysfunctional miscreants
and career mediocrities who can neither talk nor shoot straight.

It’s enough to make a blogger ask for a third round of
Sancerre and go gently into that good (and oil-riddled) night. As former New
York Mets Manager Casey Stengel asked of his horrific 1962 squad: “Can anyone
here play the game?”

Jun 01

The empathy gene

Posted on by


June 1I
happened to catch The Bill Maher Show the other night and overheard a
discussion about President Obama's handling of the Gulf disaster. Regardless of
one's perception of how well or poorly Obama has done, Maher said, he lacks
'the empathy gene.'

I
found the observation particularly astute. Obama does lack the empathy gene and
reminds me of what I've read about President Woodrow Wilson. I've just
completed a book entitled, 'George, Nicholas and Wilhelm' by Miranda Carter. It
details the three royal cousins and grandsons of Queen Victoria whose
dysfunctional relationships and management helped precipitate World War I.
According to Ms. Carter, there were very few things all three monarchs agreed upon.
One, though, was Wilson, whom Wilhelm described as an 'unmitigated, academic
bore.'

Indeed,
Wilson's highly-documented intellectual snobbery and near-total lack of
compassion contributed to his failure to convince Congress to agree to join the
League of Nations (the U.N.'s predecessor). That, in turn, set in motion the
chain of events that eventually led to World War II.

Obama
is a modern-day Wilson. He has shown a complete lack of empathy towards the
Gulf disaster and its inhabitants. Sure, he's held press conferences and made a
visit or two. But, where's the tearing eyes of a Ronald Reagan or the
hysterical sobbing of a William Jefferson Clinton? The country in general, and
the Gulf Shore in particular, desperately need to see some empathy from 44.

The
missing empathy gene got me thinking about how the various presidents in my
lifetime might have demonstrated empathy in the midst of the Gulf calamity.

Here's
what I came up with. See if you agree:

–
Obama: Cool, calm and collected to a fault. Zero empathy.

–
W: He'd be curled up in front of the tube watching a Texas Rangers game,
totally oblivious to the disaster. When finally informed, he'd defer to Cheney,
who'd laud BP for its rapid response.

–
Clinton: His tears would rival the number of gallons of oil spilled to date.
The man would be beside himself (and probably cozying up to a comely Alabama
intern to help him deal with his own, inner demons).

–
41: I think George H.W. Bush would have paid multiple visits but, lacking the
vision thing as well as any understanding of the common man, would probably
register low on the empathy gene scale.

–
Reagan: He'd know exactly what to do. He'd shed a tear or two, make us proud of
the relief workers and remind us that America's gotten through bigger crises in
the past. It would be one of his very, best roles.

–
Carter: Jimmy, Roslyn and Amy would not only be on-site full-time. They'd be
dressed in overalls and fully immersed in picking up debris and building protective
barrier reefs.

–
Ford: A genuinely good guy who had a degree of empathy. I think he'd say and do
the right thing.

–
Nixon: Forget it. A blue serge suit doesn't work well in those humid Gulf
temperatures. Plus Nixon would blame those nattering nabobs of negativity, the
press, for making a mountain out of a molehill.

–
LBJ: A Texas native and someone who looked like he was in constant pain, I
believe LBJ would have risen to the occasion and demonstrated the right
combination of empathy, sympathy and pathos.

–
JFK: He was all about his own image as The Cold Warrior. Displaying any sign of
weakness was a sure sign to the Soviets that JFK lacked the spine to fight a
nuclear war. No tears on the Gulf for this short-lived king of Camelot.

–
Ike: He was the guy who first warned us about the military-industrial complex
(think: Goldman Sachs and the Securities & Exchange Commission and BP and
MMS). Ike also managed the D-Day invasion. He'd find the fastest solution, but
he'd do so in a cold, dispassionate manner.

Questions?
Comments? Issues? Top-kill alternatives?

Dec 11

RepMan, Sr., vs. RepMan, Jr.: A microcosm of the great American debate 

Posted on by

December 11 Guest Post from Chris "RepMan, Jr." Cody

RepMan and I take pleasure in discussing geopolitical issues with each other. Though we agree on many issues, President Obama’s decision to send an additional 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan has led to the most profound disagreement we’ve had in recent memory. RepMan is staunchly against sending the troops while I am vociferously in favor of it. Though we have amicably agreed to disagree, our debate translates to the wider dispute throughout the nation.  Getting this decision right will directly impact the image and reputation of our country and our president.

RepMan, like many Americans, opposes Obama’s escalation of the war for several valid reasons.  First, he argues that if we couldn't win the war in eight years, why do we think we can now? Why continue to sacrifice young American lives? Second, RepMan points to the difficulty of sustaining attacks across the border into Pakistan. His third argument is that the liberal base will turn against Obama for escalating the war. Finally, perhaps the most convincing reason he cites is that the continuation of the war will drain more money from an already badly damaged American economy.

Rather than attempt to refute this logic, I believe one has to acknowledge it has a degree of validity. Yet when compared to the other end of the spectrum I am firmly in favor of the troop escalation. One must first recognize the war in Afghanistan is a war waged against both those responsible for the 9/11 attacks and their supporting ideology. The Bush administration, however, diverted the resources necessary to succeed away from Afghanistan and toward an irrational invasion and occupation of Iraq. Hence the reason we have not seen success in Afghanistan.  Now, with Iraq beginning to stabilize and a competent American leader finally at the helm, we have the chance to rethink and formulate an approach to successfully wage the war. A pull out would destabilize the region, sink the country into bloody civil war and embolden a highly dangerous Islamic terrorist organization responsible for the deaths of thousands of Americans. 

Continue reading →

Oct 19

Too much of anything….

Posted on by

October 19 - information-overload
I think most Democrats and Republicans alike would agree we see far too much of President Obama. He’s here. He’s there. He’s everywhere. As a result, voters tend to suffer from Obama Fatigue. I simply don’t want to see the guy anymore.

Too much of anything is a bad thing, especially for a brand. Case in point: I’m on the e-mail distribution of a certain law firm. Back in the good old, snail mail days, I looked forward to receiving their timely, thought provoking tips, trends and analysis reports.

Now, though, I’m continually bombarded by this very same firm. I must receive a new thought leadership article at least once a week, if not more. At times, I equate the law firm to the Allied invasion fleet and me as the defending German Army hunkering down on the beaches of Normandy as yet another salvo speeds my way.

It’s a shame, because I’m sure the content is relevant and important. But, in an information overload world, too much is, well, too much. I think it’s important for any and all communications to strike the proper balance between ‘just enough’ and Obama Fatigue. As for the law firm’s missives and me, I’ve adopted a Pavlovian response. As soon as I see the incoming article, I reach for the keyboard and hit ‘delete.’

Marketers should be constantly gauging the impact of their communications programs. It’s easy to do and will enable the organization to dial back the frequency and intensity of their outreach. To do otherwise is to court the bane of any communications program: indifference.

Jul 07

There was never any doubt for T.R.

Posted on by

Anxious to put the bitter taste of a losing presidential campaign behind him,Trbrazil1_3  Former President Theodore Roosevelt decided to discover a new, 1,000-foot long tributary of the Amazon River. The year was 1914 and T.R. was 54 years of age.

To put things in perspective, 54 was not the new 34 in 1914. Rather, it was very close to the end for the average male, who lived to be about 60.

But, T.R. thrived on the new and different. So, along with his son, Kermit, a few specialists and about 20 local Brazilian soldiers, he set forth on what was then called the “River of Doubt.”

Three months and 55-pounds later, T.R. emerged from the wilderness. He’d contracted malaria, re-injured an old leg that became infected and watched as one of his men drowned and another was murdered. But he emerged victorious and returned to New York as a conquering hero.

I mention the T.R. story because a) it appealed to my sense of adventure and b) it struck me that none, repeat none, of our current leaders would ever contemplate such a risky trip.

T.R. lived his life in an all-out attempt to squeeze every second from it. He never walked around an obstacle but, rather, charged through it. There was no obfuscation. No flip-flopping.

What would T.R.  do if he were alive today? Impossible to say, of course. But, based upon his image and reputation, he wouldn’t let things linger in Iraq. Nor would he allow gas prices to edge ever higher. The old trust buster wouldn’t take kindly to the endless downsizings, either.

We need a T.R. in the worst way. Sadly, the lightweights we’re stuck with couldn’t find the River of Doubt, much less navigate its treacherous path. And, the River of Doubt itself? Well, it’s now known as Rio Roosevelt in honor of the first man to chart its entire course.

May 09

Hillary would never make it as a timekeeper

Posted on by

Senator Hillary Clinton told reporters Wednesday that it ‘was still early’ in the campaign season and thatHillary_2
‘…the dynamic electoral environment’ could still swing her way.

Gimme a break. Early in the campaign season? It’s one minute to midnight and Hill’s goose is cooked. Her refusal to concede and allow the fractured Democratic Party to unite behind Barack Obama is disingenuous, deceitful and depressing.

I’ve never been a fan of Senator Clinton’s, but she’s sunk to a new low with this latest statement.

The time (pun intended) to finally step up and display some class and graciousness is now. Mark Penn and the rest of Hill’s consultants need to tell her what any public relations professional would tell a client in a similar situation. Do what’s best for the brand. And, the brand in this case is the Democratic Party.

The longer Hill delays, the more likely ’43’ will be succeeded by John McCain as our 44th president. So, look at your wristwatch, Senator Clinton. It’s later then you think.

Mar 27

1.67 pennies for your thoughts

Posted on by

The U.S. Mint recently admitted that it now costs 1.67 cents to produce a single penny. They say penniesPenny_2
now are 97.5 percent zinc with thin copper plating and admit that the value of the metal exceeds the coin’s face value! To borrow Peppercom’s Deb Brown’s favorite expression, ‘you simply can’t make this stuff up.’

So, in a period of tremendous economic uncertainty, market flux and job loss, our country is deficit-spending to create coins that no one wants or uses. What’s wrong with this picture? A penny for your thoughts. Make that 1.67 pennies for your thoughts.

I’m surprised I haven’t read more news stories about this farce. I’m also surprised McCain, Hill or Barry haven’t jumped on the issue to position it as yet another example of big government waste. God knows Clinton and Obama need something right now to distract negative stories.

If I were running the show, I’d tell the U.S. Mint management team we’ll be deducting an extra .67 cents from their annual salaries for every new penny they make. That should get their attention. I’d also enroll them in an Economics 101 class ASAP.

Whoever’s running the U.S. Mint is one bad penny. One might even call them cents less.

Thanks to Deb Brown for the idea.

Mar 06

Note to Hillary: There’s no ‘I’ in team

Posted on by

Greg Schneiders’ most excellent opinion piece in PR Week answered a question I’ve been wrestling withHillary
for some time: why do I overwhelmingly prefer Obama to Hillary?

As Schneider points out, Hillary’s speeches routinely employ the first person (‘I did this. I did that. I will do this. I will do that’). Obama, on the other hand, is a third person advocate (‘We will do this. We CAN do that together,’ etc.).

Hillary is iconoclastic, idiosyncratic and isolated. Obama seems warm, engaging and collegial by comparison. Coming on the heels of a disastrous administration whose leader was a sheltered, self-centered president who either dismissed criticism or questioned critics’ patriotism, Obama really does seem like a much needed breath of fresh air.

I’ve always been a fan of the ‘we’ word and recoil in disgust on the rare occasions when Peppercom employees opt for first person self aggrandizement in client or prospect meetings. Success, whether it be in business or politics, is a group activity. My best guess is that Schneiders is dead on. Hillary is all about Hillary, and Obama is all about the average American.

There’s no ‘I’ in team, either on Pennsylvania or Madison Avenues. And, that’s why ‘Hill’ will remain on Capitol Hill and not be back in the White House with Bill and Chelsea in tow.