There is a conflict.
On the one hand, we have Robert Gibbs, who I like and admire. He speaks slowly and clearly, and always has just a hint of a smile, as if there is a whole lot more that he is not saying. He’s pleasant and easy to like. He’s a lot like his boss, Barack Obama, in that sense.
Of course, that’s his job, to be a public face for Obama, a buffer between him and the rabid dogs of Rupert Murdoch. So, it’s natural that those who like Obama, like Gibbs.
I still like Barack Obama. I am disappointed in his failure to prosecute any Republicans for their numerous crimes against humanity and against the U.S. constitution. I am dismayed that he didn’t fight for a single payer health care plan, and that he failed to rally the Democratic party around the public option or around the medicare buy-in plan. I am disturbed that he continues to try and deal with Republicans, who will never, ever support him no matter what he does.
But I still, basically, like and admire the guy and his press secretary, too.
Then you have Ed Schultz, who I’d never heard of before. He is, like Keith Olbermann, a sports commentator turned political pundit. He was apparently a Republican at one point, who now considers himself a liberal progressive. It’s nice to see somebody moving in that direction.
Anyway, he recently told Robert Gibbs he was full of shit. It wasn’t in front of a microphone, it wasn’t on camera, so basically we just have his word for it on the terminology. Robert Gibbs, as far as we know, doesn’t talk like that.
The argument was over health care, and I have to agree with Schultz. He says that the current bill is a giveaway to the insurance companies and that what we need is a single player health care. Socialized medicine. You get sick, you go see a doctor. After all, we don’t make our children pay every time they see a teacher.
So, you have Gibbs, who I like, getting a bucketload of shit from Schultz, and I’m on Schultz’s side.
As I say, there is a conflict.
www.gurukalehuru.com 