Kremlinology
Anybody here remember Kremlinology? The original version, I mean? I do. Grainy photos from Red Square would be scrutinized to see who was standing where and how close to Brezhnev; texts would be parsed for clues to what the Soviets were really planning. Anyway, that’s what popped into my head as I was reading this piece by Ezra Klein on the president’s speech last night:
He also did not utter the words “climate change” or “global warming”…Obama did not make any specific promises about the bill he would support, or even that he wanted. He did not say he would price carbon, or that we should get a certain percentage of our energy from renewables by a certain date….But his language was a close echo of the language he used in the health-care fight. “There are costs associated with this transition,” he said, using a formulation many will remember from health care…The optimistic take, at least for environmentalists, is that this is the language and approach Obama uses when he really means to legislate. The pessimistic take is that Obama shied away from clearly describing the problem, did not endorse specific legislation, did not set benchmarks, and chose poll-tested language rather than a sharper case that might persuade skeptics.
Wouldn’t it be cool if we had system where the president gave a speech about what he was going to do, and it was in normal language and everybody understood it and it was true?
5 Responses to “Kremlinology”
-
iforgotmyname says:
that would be awesome. It’s clearly too much to ask for though.
June 16th, 2010 at 12:28 pm EST -
Cleaver says:
The optimistic take, at least for environmentalists, is that this is the language and approach Obama uses when he really means to legislate.
Of course the president doesn’t legislate, does he, Ezra?
Ezra?
-
Toonces says:
Do the sell-out bloggers really think healthcare was a success? Holy shit.
-
Violet Socks says:
Ezra does.
-
votermom says:
You mean kinda like this lady does?
http://still4hill.wordpress.co.....-is-doing/
