My Review on UP with Chris Hayes

Got my first look at a show that I was excited to hear about, UP with Chris Hayes.  I had listened to him comment on other shows and really liked the way he made thoughtful arguments.  I also liked the way he would hold people’s feet to fire when he interviewed them, asking all the questions that is worthy of being asked and others avoid asking.  I was a little disappointed when I watched today.  His guests were Maggie Haberman from Politico, William Cohen of Vanity Fair, Rinku Sen of Colorlines.com and Reihan Salam of The Daily.com. 

The style of debate on the show was refreshing and the time Chris gave others to respond was great.  Each made valid points when it was their time to debate but the one flaw was when they made statements which I thought deserved more explanation, Chris failed to ask or inquire more.  In an effort of being totally fair, those on the panel never pushed the other to explain more in detail either.

William Cohen mentioned that Obama had taken money from “Wall Street Fat Cats” but was not pressed on whether those fat cats were any of the ones who joined his economic council or supported his call for raising taxes on the wealthy.  Maggie Haberman mentioned that this White House was not feared but was not asked whether being feared is the proper way to lead.  Leadership by fear can also be given other titles like Dictator and she should have been forced to explain if that’s the type of leader she wanted.  Reihan Salam mentioned that Obama was seen as not a “good president” but was not pressed on his definition of a good president.

It should have been made clear that each individual has their own style and instead of comparing them to others, you must first understand their style and how it is supposed to work.  No one can demean or belittle another’s approach unless you know how that approach was supposed to work and how it went wrong.  Obama has always advocated speaking to everyone including his enemies.  He was even laughed at by some and called naive.  He has already shown that he will speak frankly to those with him and against him but he will do it privately unless the situation calls for a different tactic.  If you compare what this president has accomplished as compared to those before him, then and only then could anyone say whether he is a good president or not.  Being a good president does not encompass doing what any particular group wants all the time every time because if you are the President of the United States, you have to be the president of all the United States, all the time.