Listen to Ross and Burbank weekdays on KIRO Radio 97.3 FM
 Ross+Burbank


Most popular
Help us build a Fisher House
Bonneville Seattle is raising funds for the construction of a second Fisher House at Joint Base Lewis-McChord in Tacoma and we need your help.
obama2.jpg
Re-election certainly made the President Barack Obama more confident. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

Did the election change anything?

BY Dave Ross  on November 15, 2012 @ 8:31 am (Updated: 8:58 am - 11/15/12 )

Well, re-election certainly made the president more confident -- he definitely likes his chances against the two senators who tried to beat up on his UN Ambassador, Susan Rice.

"Senator McCain and Senator Graham and others want to go after somebody they should go after me," said President Barack Obama.

It also gave him the confidence to insist on better manners during news conferences.

"That was a great question, but it would be a horrible precedent for me to answer your question just because you yelled it out," he said.

And it also made him willing to reach out and hold hands across the aisle.

"This is just a matter of whether or not we come together and go ahead and say Democrats and Republicans we're both going to hold hands and do what is right for the American people," Obama said.

So elections have consequences, it's just that those consequences don't appear to include a quick solution to the stuff that actually affects our lives.

Because not only was he reelected, but so was the Republican congress and so we have two colliding mandates. He's not going to extend tax cuts on the wealthy, and Republicans are going to insist that he does.

The debates, the billions of dollars in ads, the speeches, the polls, the swing states, the interactive maps, the great majesty of a democratic process that is the envy of the world -- that news conference Wednesday made it clear we are exactly where we were in 2011.

"I didn't get reelected just to bask in reelection," said Obama.

Are you sure about that? Are you sure?

"That was a great question, but it would be a horrible precedent for me to answer your question just because you yelled it out."

Sorry.

Dave Ross, KIRO Radio Talk Show Host
Dave Ross is co-host of The Ross & Burbank Show on KIRO Radio (weekdays 9-Noon) and never too far from the spotlight.
More Ross and Burbank

MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (17)


  • Add A Comment

  • ron prevost wrote...
    Short answer, Dave. - Nothing has changed, not even the arrogance.
    November 15, 2012 8:23 am
    The President finally held a news conference after - what - 10 months. ... And basically stated he was above all such.

    Nice note, Dave, on his put-down of a reporter yelling a question. But, Mr. Wizard, isn't that how it's been done mostly for like 100+ years? But, remember, even dead embassy workers can't stray 'off script'.

    But somewhat related to Benghazi, he knocks McCain and Graham for questioning 'his' UN Ambassador, Susan Rice. Gee, all she did was repeat the official cover story. But IF she is being nominated Sec. of State, I would hate for her to have no mind of her own. Otherwise my dog could fill the position quite nicely.

    And that little thing of the fiscal cliff coming up in 6 weeks. Mr. President, it's nice you and congressional republicans agree that taxes should not go upon the middle class (but what about that 'affordable' health thing?). So we are only talking taxes on 2 or 3%? But it seems your position is totally unyielding. ....... Dumb me, I thought compromise was a two way street . .. BOTH ways.

    But, then, that would set another horrible precedent, wouldn't it.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Chuck Gould wrote...
    The changes, in the first week or so, are evident;
    November 15, 2012 8:24 am
    The political standoff is going to get worse. Much, much, worse.

    Unable to defeat Obama at the polls, the rumblings for his "impeachment" are beginning to growl deep down in the bowels of Republican congressmen. A page straight out of the Clinton-era playbook. Maybe we can track down Ken Starr and give him a $billion-dollar budget again?

    Screw the Republicans. Screw the Democrats, too. Neither tribe of lunatics, fanatics, and thieves gets it. Your job is to tackle the problems facing the American people, not try to position your party to prevail in the next election!

    It's like an echo chamber back in DC. Obama says to the House, "It's my way or the highway", and that's *exactly* what he hears in return.

    The Republicans will be happy to see the problems facing the US get worse, even much worse, over the next four years just to help improve their chances at the polls in 2014 and 2016. The Democrats are the same, with no real interest in solving the problems we face. The primary interest of the Democrat party is finding a way to *blame* the continuing downward spiral on the Republicans, not correct it.

    Fast forward to the 2014 elections. Republican pitch: "You need to run all of these Democrat congressmen out of town and replace them with Republicans! Look! The problems are even worse now [in part because we Republicans have avoided participating in any process that would solve them] than when we re-relected Obama in 2012!

    Democrat pitch for 2014: "You need to run all of these obstructionist Republicans out of town and replace them with Democrats! We would have solved these problems long ago if it weren't for the Republicans...[and the pesky fact that they represent the interests and philosophies of roughly half the people in America- according to the recent popular vote].

    People who are too dammm stupid to figure out how to work with people who don't have exactly the same political perspective have no business being in a representative government, either as president or in either house of congress.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    Chuck-some good points but I point the finger to the american public, the majority whom are stunningly un-informed and merely parrot talking points or the lies of political campain commercials.
    November 15, 2012 8:59 am
    I am a rare voter that votes against the incumbent. I am rare in that I make sure I get news from at least one solid non partision/idealogical news source. Yes-in addition I watch one Fox news opinion show (not Hannity) however I watch CNN as well. (MSNBC is a clown show-face it) The majority of uS voters want the other guy to pay more taxes, want as much as possible for me, hasn't truly run the math on yearly debt, laffer curve, the number of companies leaving the US. (Don't think for a minute that this only happens when a D is president.) Google Boeing encourage suppliers to move business out of country. The conference is tommorrow.) Wake up young americans, you are getting hosed and you haven't a clue!!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Chuck Gould wrote...
    logical open mind and the American public
    November 15, 2012 9:18 am
    The American Public has only two options in our system. 1) We can elect people who will represent our interests once in office. It is now so routine for politicians to lie about what they will do when running for office and then doing something entirely contrary when actually elected that we consider it normal, par for the course. We have learned to expect very little from our politicians, and we get even less.

    2) We can rise up in armed, Jeffersonian rebellion. Chances of success of such an endeavor, absolutely less than *ZERO*.

    So, we need to tweak the system.

    The correct fix is to eliminate politics as a "permanent profession" for anybody.

    1. Limit the POTUS to a single six-year term. No option for reelection. No option for the VP to run for POTUS immediately after his six year term in that office, either.

    2. Limit senators to no more than two six-year terms. No option for re-election after the second term.

    3. Expand the term of representatives to three years from the present two, and limit the tenure of representatives to no more than three terms (nine years).

    No government pensions for senators, representatives, or the president. Let them pay into social security, and augment that with payments to a 401K, like everybody else has to do.

    Politicians who move to Washington DC for more than 6, 9, or 12 years lose touch with the people they are supposed to represent. Furthermore, being constantly up for re-election (as is the house), leaves politicians especially vulnerable to special interest groups willing to fund or threatening to withhold funding from their non-stop campaigns.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • roomtemp wrote...
    I like those ideas Chuck...
    November 15, 2012 5:39 pm
    You radical! -grin-

    The trouble is in getting them implemented. 'All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others'. The more equal ones won't like the change.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    So, Chuck. How will we start the road back to sanity?
    November 15, 2012 9:10 am
    McCain and Graham seem like rational guys - certainly NOT part of the republican 'leadership' ... Throw in a Barbara Feinstein and some other democrats who don't believe the sun rises and sets with Harry Reid, and we've got a start. ... But, will it happen?

    This is the kind of thing I'd take up were I 25 or 30 again. But I'm not. So all that can be hoped is that somehow, someone gets some common sense. ... In history, the last time this country was more divided was in the late 1850's. When this country faced another cliff.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Chuck Gould wrote...
    Ron, we won't change politics until we change the politicians
    November 15, 2012 9:27 am
    See my term limit concept posted here.

    Imagine a world where every single politician wasn't fighting for his or her personal political "career", and was actually fighting for his or her constituents instead!

    (No wonder some of you guys accuse me of being radical) :-)

    Let's restructure so that our elected officials are serving the best interests of the public, rather than constantly scheming to convert the public sentiment and treasury to their own personal interests.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • mnpat wrote...
    I agree with you post but don't let it end there
    November 15, 2012 9:41 am
    Entitlements and the debt need to change, until then any decrease in spending is just a spit into the wind....and neither party wants to break the bad news..................for years all we have done is to add more band aids to issues the government feels need to be addressed, but no one....I repeat no one has ever fixed the problem because fixing real problems becomes painful.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Lonestar wrote...
    You're doing a heck of a job, Obama
    November 15, 2012 8:50 am
    The stock market is tanking, your CIA director is gone, and those Sandy victims? They can shiver in the dark since you don't need their votes anymore. In this is only the first week of Obama II.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Chuck Gould wrote...
    per Lonestar's post, one thing has not changed. The easily misled
    November 15, 2012 9:05 am
    will continue to follow their talk show shepherds.

    Out of 8.5 million people who lost electrical power during Hurricane Sandy, power has been restored to about 99%. Less than 85,000 (out of 8.5 million) are still "shivering in the dark" and regretting their vote for Obama.

    America could have responded faster. Heck, all we would need is a *bigger government!* and then people who lost power would not have had to be so self reliant and personally responsible....... :-)

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • cdbtx wrote...
    Can you show me
    November 15, 2012 10:49 am
    one question that he actually answered during his press conference?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • HLC wrote...
    The reason Obozo won?
    November 15, 2012 12:33 pm
    His supporters in 2008 did not want to admit they made a big mistake puting the fool behind the desk. They would rather let him run the country into the ground and blame it on Bush instead of voting for someone that wanted to help the country get back on it's feet. They may have won the election but It's My Way Or The Hiway will most cetainly lose the war on America.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • SeattleD wrote...
    Disgusting how the Republitards are exploiting the deaths of four Americans
    November 15, 2012 6:09 pm
    to try and punish Obama for winning the election.

    McCain even refused to attend the Benghazi briefing because he didn't want to hear any information that is contrary to his preconceived notions.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }