"It wasn't like 'Let's have a discussion.' It was 'One, two, three, four, here's what we're going to do,'" a staffer said. "When things don't go well, he doesn't yell and scream. He's very prescriptive. Everybody understands this isn't about having a discussion. He's got 99 percent of the voting shares. There's no point in taking a vote."
The buck stops with Obama. We had fun with the idea that Obama was stifling dissent in the benevolent dictatorship of his campaign.
So, for those keeping track at home, that's ten instances of Obama publicly blaming his staff for various screw-ups.
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10!
(You of course could also add Austan Goolsbee, Samantha Power, Gordon Fischer, and retired Gen. Tony McPeak.)
That would be 14. We will continue to keep track.
Obama was for stopping the buck at himself before he was against it.
Tapper extends grace to the beleaguered staffers where Obama shows none:
And for the record, yet again, let me state that I find Sen. Obama's staff unfailingly competent and polite, courteous and efficient, and I once again express my regret that Sen. Obama does apparently not feel the same way.
We hereby retract the “benevolent” modifier used previously to describe Obama’s dictatorship of a campaign.
MORE: Channelling a James Taranto “reliable sources” entry on Best of the Web Today, we’re surprised the unidentified staffer in the WaPo article wasn’t qualified as, “...a staffer, who spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to avoid being blamed by Obama for screwing something up, said...”