Re: Obama not talking to Hayward - President can't say it, but I will . . .

[Empowerer]

In response to the whining hypocrites in the media who claim to be SHOCKED that the president has not spoken to Tony Hayward and who are behaving as if Obama's refusal to talk to Hayward is some kind of major lapse of responsibility:

The President's answer was reasonable and credible - that there was no reason to talk to him because "my experience is, when you talk to a guy like a BP CEO, he’s gonna say all the right things to me. I’m not interested in words. I’m interested in action.”

That makes perfect sense. But what the President DIDN'T say is that, a phone call from the President means something. Even if he's calling you to bless you out, the fact that he's taking the time to have a conversation with you elevates you to a different level. I believe that the President doesn't want to give Hayward to satisfaction of being able to go around telling people, "I talked to the President today" or "The President called me this week" or "As I was telling the President the other day . . ." I think the President has no intention of squandering his - for lack of better word - "star power" on the likes of Hayward, but instead is dealing with him through intermediaries as a subtle show of dismissal and, possibly, disdain.

Of course, the President can't say that because he'd be showing his "arrogance" - you know, revealing that he actually thinks he's entitled to be President and accorded some respect. But I believe that, in addition to the explanation he gave to Lauer, another reason that President Obama has not talked to Hayward is that he does not intend to dignify him with his attention. Period.

[bluestateguy]

1. Hayward isn't even an American

Unless he is a foreign head of state, a foreigner should not be given that level of presidential respect.

[Thrill]

2. BINGO

[boston bean]

3. When BP is not allowed to order the press, the volunteers, and politicians

around, I might agree with you. But Haywards position has been elevated. As a matter of fact, when Obama said he would fire him, and BP remains in control, he is elevated. Why the hell is he allowing them to be in TOTAL control of every aspect of the clean up?

I believe actions speak louder than words and if Obama doesn't kick someones ass pretty soon, his comments about kicking ass will turn around and kick his ass.

[vaberella]

27. He's not. Have you been watching Rachel Maddow's show?

That's hardly the case. You see US government officials out there with some contracted workers----most of which are from the government. So, no...this is not BP with total control on clean up. Unfortunately besides Rachel's show--no one is getting that.

[xchrom]

4. Unrec - that 'gusher' is happening in American territory.

The prez is the land lord in chief - you might say.

Hayward is the tenant - or spokesman for the tenant.

The prez has the real final say here -- or can have.

[Empowerer]

6. And what, pray tell, would he say to Hayward that can't be communicated to him otherwise?

[Cha]

8. I'd like to hear that too.

[eleny]

5. That's how I've been feeling about it

Not talking to the CEO of BP during this situation means that a CEO is beneath the POTUS.

It's a touchy situation because Hayward has been lying his ass off. If Obama had been discussing things with him, then Obama would be painted as the dumbass-in-chief who got duped. Not speaking directly to him was best in retrospect.

Now, it's important who does speak with Hayward in public and private. But that's a separate issue.

Oh, and btw, about Obama finding out whose ass to kick.... That's not just BP. That trail leads to the Cheney/Bush cabal. And I believe that it's exactly what Obama meant when he said that to Lauer. It was a message to Cheney in his undisclosed hidey hole.

[Mimosa]

25. ^ IMO eleny has got it! ^

Eleny:
"It's a touchy situation because Hayward has been lying his ass off. If Obama had been discussing things with him, then Obama would be painted as the dumbass-in-chief who got duped. Not speaking directly to him was best in retrospect."

[4lbs]

7. Why should Obama talk to Hayward anyway?

Hayward's main concern is the revenue, profit, and shareholders of BP. He'll just give Obama some dog and pony act.

It's better that Obama reserve those limited daily minutes he has talking to the scientists, experts, and workers in the Gulf.

[Cha]

9. That's right...there's no reason and it's the President

who knows what is better use of his time.

[Empowerer]

11. And if he HAD talked to him, the squawking classes would be screaming at him for that, too

Demanding to know why he was wasting his time and his political cache on the likes of Hayward - and, as sure as night follows day, calling him a naive sucker for listening to someone with so little credibility.

[Cha]

12. Yeah, they have arrows in their mediawhore quiver for

every scenario..they're sleazy that way.

[Empowerer]

10. Obama basically called Hayward a liar

in saying there's no need to talk to him because he'll only tell him what he wants to hear.

President Obama reminds me of my father. I used to get so frustrated by the fact that he rarely confronted people who had slighted him. That was, until I realized how skillfully and surgically he later undercut them in ways that were so much more impactful and lasting than an outright confrontation ever could be.

[global1]

13. Why Should Obama Talk To Hayward - After All Bush Didn't Talk To God After Katrina....nt

[elehhhhna]

23. +1000. You said that so well! Thanks.

[Clio the Leo]

14. If Hayward is able to speak w/the President, then it takes some power away from Adm. Allen....

.... why should Hayward even pick up the phone for Allen if he has the President's ear?

I suspect that a part of it. Adm. Allen is the man the President has invested authority in for the situation ... Hayward is not a head of state ... Adm. Allen is as high up as Hayward needs to go.

[Empowerer]

15. Exactly

But, of course, the media are twisting themselves in knots trying to find some "angle" to enable them to keep talking about this story - since just covering it and reporting facts takes too much work.

[GeorgeGist]

16. The rather reminds me of the logic used ...

for Bush refusing to talk to suspected terrorist heads of state.

I wonder why President Obama doesn't sieze this a teachable moment?
Has he concluded that the head of BP is too stupid to learn?
Has he concluded that he is not a good teacher?
Or does he now realize, that leaving BP in charge of the spill was an act of gross negligence.

[Empowerer]

18. Really? That's strange

[Dr Morbius]

17. Presumably, Mr. "Heywardjablomie" understands that Admiral Allen...

speaks for the President, and therefore if the President has any message he wants Hayward to get, he tells Allen. It would kind of undermine Allen's authority to go around him. Meanwhile, establishing the pecking order sends a powerful message to the hotshot CEO: this is a mighty nation, and Obama holds the most powerful office on the planet.

Were I in the President's role, I wouldn't speak directly to Hayward either. Freaking corporations think they run things as it is.

[ellie]

19. Is this the new

thing that everyone is freaking out about? It's hard to keep up.

[Empowerer]

20. Eyup

"Why hasn't he talked to the president of BP?!?!?!?!" = the latest outrage.

[Vattel]

21. Taken at face value, what Obama said is ridiculous.

I'm not saying that Obama should talk to Hayward, but the explanation he gave to Lauer was obviously silly. He made a sweeping generalization about "guys like a BP CEO" and he implied that he couldn't possibly gain or convey some useful information through a conversation with Hayward if Hayward was apt to try to bullshit him. I'm sure Obama has his reasons for not talking to Hayward. But I suspect that what he said to Lauer was aimed less at revealing those reasons than at appearing tough and indignant.

[vaberella]

29. I think this is because he already spoke to the head of BP before.

When this thing went down there's no way Obama was not speaking to the head of BP in order to correlate and understand what was going on they had to have spoken before. However, post the news breaking out---what has happened?! We have the CEO of BP all over television for weeks talking about how they have control of this and everything is working out. And for people not to worry. Obviously he's been lying. It's made doubly worse by the fact BP is running pro ads for itself. I think Obama got fed up with this and said he's not winning any games talking to this guy. However, I think it's rather illogical for us to assume they were not in communication early on.

[lamp_shade]

22. Wholeheartedly agree. K&R

[JoeyT]

24. +1

Hayward is just going to lie anyway. No reason he can't lie to a subordinate.

[Mimosa]

26. Sometimes you can only talk via lawyers

This whole mess is going to wind up in the courts big time!

It's smart for Obama not to directly talk to Hayward.

[Hawkowl]

28. Very true

It would be an extraordinary diplomatic faux pax to talk to a mere British CEO. If Obama is really pissed he picks up the phone to chat with the Prime Minister or the Queen--both of whom would be severely disrespected by Obama's chatting directly with Hayward.

Now, maybe a phone call from Eric Holder or the FBI would be appropriate.