Whether or not you personally like President Obama or approve of his policies, Vanity Fair contributing editor Michael Lewis wants you to know one thing: "He's an interesting cat."
"He's different," Lewis, the author of Moneyball and Liar's Poker, told Rachel Maddow on Tuesday's The Rachel Maddow Show. His new Vanity Fair piece, "Obama's Way," focuses on the president's decision to conduct American airstrikes in Libya in March 2011. While researching and writing the piece, Lewis was given 8 months of access to Obama.
What the writer learned from those months, he said, was that the president has a unique way of handling difficult choices, particularly those choices that are "thrust upon him." One such choice was thrust upon Obama, Lewis said, in the moment when now-deceased Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi "[marched] through the desert, promising to exterminate a million people in [Libyan capital] Benghazi."
Lewis said he centered his profile of Obama around Libya because he "wanted to find a decision that sort of had [Obama's] fingerprints all over it." Obama's Libya policy, he said, succeeded because the president found an unconventional solution to the problems confronting him.
"It's a very interesting dynamic he created," Lewis said. "He solved a problem; he went outside of the process to solve the problem, in such a way that it was not construed as an act of American imperialism or a lust for Libyan oil. It was just a humanitarian intervention, and it worked. It's one of his triumphs, what he did in Libya, and as a result, you don't hear a lot about it."
Hindsight may be 20/20, but Lewis was quick to note that the decision was not an easy one, and could have just as easily been a tactical mistake.
During a Monday night appearance at Lincoln Center with Vanity Fair editor-in-chief Graydon Carter, Lewis revealed he had to submit his quotes to the White House for approval before publication.
Leave a Comment:
Why is it that news and opinions of these particular news items never reach a large audience. Where out rite lies are all over the news. I BELIEVE IN GIVING CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE even if the credit goes to a republican. Business is business, and the business of this country is our business.
It reflects on Mr Obama's intelligence and striking gut feeling for whatever confronts him. There is simply no comparison between the current republican slate and Mr Obama and Mr Biden. I want, America needs and deserves, smart in the White House. 8 long years of George Bush should have sunk in by now. There is simply no room for maybe's or should have's or might have done's anymore. Hindsight is always 20/20. Romney and Ryan's collective vision is myopic and narrow. Slogans do not equal well-thought-out policy or decisions.
Blowing off Netanyahu was hardly intelligent or smart. I will admit that it was likely well-thought-out, as well as reflecting his gut feelings. President Obama seems to be repulsed by Netanyahu.
You are wrong: There is room for might-haves and maybes when it comes to Obama and his sycophants on the Left. He "saved a million people from extermination in Benghazi." He "prevented another Great Depression."
Uh-huh.
This comes at the most ridiculous time. It has been, as they say, overtaken by events. I suppose it was too late to axe Mr. Lewis from the lineup.
Rewrite: "'It was just a humanitarian intervention, and it didn't work.'"
Four years ago, Brokaw and Gregory were discussing Obama and how "We don't really know him... who is he? ... the truth is we really don't know who he is..."
Today, you are all asking the same questions... and you still have no idea who Obama really is.
OK, Jack, for once your logic makes perfect sense. Actually, I rather appreciate your point - the unknowns always seem strangly huge, nearly every time. Think that may have more to do with the surplus of flip-flops, in all candidates, running for office. I think that the lack of honest conversation hurts both sides and, even more, the voter. Anyway, I checked your little "up" thingy, because I appreciate your very reasoned comment.
It was an interesting interview with Rachel Maddow and I want to go out and get the Vanity Fair Magazine. I rarely want to read real print these days, but I want to read what else he found out about our President.
excuse me... since when do we have to submit anything for approval by the white house? i guess freedom of the press and opinion was written out of the constitution? will one of you out there tell me why we should be okay with this statement... " lewis revealed he had to submit his quotes to the white house for approval before publication.' you really want to know what obama thinks then go see 2016 a documentary that the "main stream media" has not talked about at all.... why is that you think? if there are any out there that still do think!!!
Mr. Lewis was given considerably more access to the president with this agreement in place.
It is the first time that you are hearing that things are pre approved. How niave are you people.
Want to see what the one percent and the GOP want? Watch the "Hunger Games"
we are lucky to have him and need to keep him on for another term
A journalist can always refuse to submit the quotes, but then they run the risk of having their article disavowed, saying they were misquoted. For an 8 month access to the president, this seems like a good deal. It is a scoop,and they would want their scoop to go to print. It is not uncommon for a journalist to read back quotes for articles, at any rate. If it was showing the whole story, then yes, journalists would bridle at that.