So where, exactly, should I paste the embed URL from that video?

Note to OohRah:

In order to embed vid you gotta C&P the embed code into the body portion of the blog entry.

NOT the URL code.

Be Well.

RWers: Obama never answered the questions ergo Bret won.

LWers: Bret interrupted so often Obama was unable to answer the question.

And round and round we go.

Wheeeee!

Be Well.

OK, the body and not the summary. I'll try that next time.

Obama tried talking about the issue while Bret concentrated on (the flawed) process.
by Spud

aka, commence digging the shallow graves;
also ideal for potato(e)s

Are you kidding me with that incorrect headline? You must have seen a different interview then. In the interview I saw Obama refused to answer questions and was wasting time with hot air and talking points.

And besides, didn't Obama say Fox News wasn't a real news organization? Why would he agree to be interviewed by a non news entity?

RWers: Obama never answered the questions ergo Bret won.

LWers: Bret interrupted so often Obama was unable to answer the question.

Who Won?!?!?

It's an interview, from a news organization

It shouldn't be about who won. The point of an interview is to gleam information, not to play gotcha or try to prove how wrong the person is.

Just proves that Fox is more about spreading their ideology and not reporting facts.

It's an interview, from a news organization.

That's highly debatable.

It shouldn't be about who won. The point of an interview is to gleam information, not to play gotcha or try to prove how wrong the person is.

Not disagreeing that it shouldn't be about "Won or Lost" just acknowledging that politics in the US is a blood sport between two armed camp and is "Scored" as such in the minds of too many.

The 51/49% solution, as Spud refers to it.

Just proves that Fox is more about spreading their ideology and not reporting facts.

Roger Ailes, the head of FNC, is a long time political operative for the Republican party and to him Fox News is a 24/7 /365 ad buy for the GOP.

Flick on FOX any time day or night and one can see the truth of this.

The opinion shows all tout RW talking points and the so-called hard news division do the same.

In the interview I saw Obama refused to answer questions and was wasting time with hot air and talking points.

Thanx fer proving Spud's point once again.

And besides, didn't Obama say Fox News wasn't a real news organization? Why would he agree to be interviewed by a non news entity?

Coupla things here.

First, FOX isn't a real news organization and anyone who thinks it is is terminally stupid.

Second, if Obama didn't go on FOX then he would be accused of being "afraid" of going on by the right.

Finally, preaching to the choir is a good practice in church not in politics.

Just cos you changed yer nom de blog doesn't mean you've changed at all.

Be Well.

I listened to the entire interview.

Obama prattled on endlessly repeating the same, bullshit talking-points. While I respected Brett's desire to ask as many questions as possible during a short-period of time, I was irritated by his interruptions.

If you watch/listen to the entire segment, Brit Hume plus Bair's 4 panelists parse it to near-perfection. What I found most fascinating was that Krauthammer was more generous toward Obama than either Stoddard or Juan Willians.

All in all I thought Obama handled this poorly. The lone exception being his answer to Brett's question of this bill's passage (or not) affecting Obama's legacy. Obama adroitly countered that his concern wasn't his legacy, but the well-being of the people he was elected to represent - it was a strong answer. The rest of his answers...not so strong.

He's an embarrasement as our President, period.

He's an embarrasement as our President, period.

Yer thinking about Bush again?

Meh, at least Obama can prolly spell "embarrassed".

Obama prattled on endlessly repeating the same, bullshit talking-points. While I respected Brett's desire to ask as many questions as possible during a short-period of time, I was irritated by his interruptions.

First, Obama's "bullshit talking points" weren't.

Second, it was like a meeting of the non sequitar society.

Obama talked about the issue and then Bret concentrated on the process and, of course, bullshit GOP approved talking points.

/Also watched the full interview.

Be Well.

Obama filibustered as much as Brett interrupted. He made no attempt to honestly answer any questions or go off the robotic script. He is not good on his feet without a teleprompter, and he did nothing to help his cause in this interview.

Obama talked about the issue and then Bret concentrated on the process and, of course, bullshit GOP approved talking points.

The process is awfully important - Obama blew it off.

When pressed on the substance, Obama punted. He was on the defensive the entire time.

That's highly debatable.

Not really. They kick the shit out of their cable competitors.

The opinion shows all tout RW talking points and the so-called hard news division do the same.

You're full of shit. Outside of Hannity's awful segment, even their opinion shows have a wide-mix of conservative and liberal viewpoints clearly expressed - They report/you decide.

First, Obama's "bullshit talking points" weren't.

Um, yes they were. He is going to slash Medicare expenditures by a half Trillion and instead of using the savings to stall the impending Medicare bankruptcy he is going to take that money and spend it on a new entitlement. All the while he claims that he is strengthening Medicare when he is acutally weakening it. When Medicare cuts truly have to happen, he will have already grabbed all of the low-haning fruit and spent it on a different entitlement all so that he can try and garner a positive CBO score. I am just scratching the surface here - I can go into much further detail, if you wish.

...Cont...

Obama filibustered as much as Brett interrupted. He made no attempt to honestly answer any questions or go off the robotic script. He is not good on his feet without a teleprompter, and he did nothing to help his cause in this interview.

#12 | Posted by cookfish

He mostly sucked ass.

Ook! ;-)

Obama was busy doing what he intended to do....sell health care reform. He knows Fox News is an oppositional network so I think he was ignoring the questions about process because he wanted Fox News viewers to hear about the benefits from reform that they will get if it passes instead of getting into a fruitless discussion about processes Fox pretends are unprecedented when in fact they have been used, by Republicans, many, many times. To get into the process discussion you have to accept the idea that there is something new or different going on when there isn't.

"He is not good on his feet without a teleprompter, and he did nothing to help his cause in this interview."

Sorry Cookfish but that talking point was forever disproven when he kicked the Republicans' asses at their own retreat.

First, FOX isn't a real news organization and anyone who thinks it is is terminally stupid.

Every study that has been performed regarding media bias has been at least somewhat flawed. However, every study that has been attempted has shown FOX to be the most centrist and fair of ALL TV news segments.

Second, if Obama didn't go on FOX then he would be accused of being "afraid" of going on by the right

He went on FOX because he is desperate. His staff is smart enough to recognize that FOX has a huge audience and said audience has a fair number of Democrats and Independents. This was the equivaltent of a 'Hail Mary' in football. Now, to be fair to team-Obama, Gibbs has appeared on Wallace's Sunday show on more-than one occasion now.

Obama talked about the issue and then Bret concentrated on the process and, of course, bullshit GOP approved talking points.

The process is indefensible. Of course Bret would try and pin him down on that cesspool.

Danni, if it's so important to sell this great bill, why no publish it? Or does he think the Public is too stupid and wouldn't understand it? Both you and him are just spinning and not addressing the simple questions most people have.
And by not addressing the special deals it took to get the bill this far, he looks like a crook.

I knew that mentioning 'teleprompter' would bring one of the pp-ers out. Thanks for being that guy, Danni.

Sorry Cookfish but that talking point was forever disproven when he kicked the Republicans' asses at their own retreat.

#16 | Posted by danni

Yes, but then he got his ass handed to him at his own, televised healthcare "summit".

He then further marginalized himself with his FOX interview which made Palin's interview with Katie Couric look almost good by comparison.

Not really. They kick the shit out of their cable competitors.

Uh-huh and the National Enquirer outsells the NYT.

Does that mean the NE is the better news outlet?

The process is awfully important - Obama blew it off.

The process is not nearly as important as the issue itself.

When pressed on the substance, Obama punted. He was on the defensive the entire time.

When pressed on the process Obama stayed on message and talked about what was important.

Until Bret interrupted him again, that is.

Um, yes they were.

Um, no they weren't.

Obama is gonna bring tens of millions of currently uninsured people under the umbrella of coverage at a 1% cost increase.

The current system where people are going broke or dying due to unscrupulous business practices by Big Insurers who have lobbied themselves into a position that enables them to profit off of other people's pain by denying care even to those who are ostensibly covered.

You can argue that the Obama backed HC plan does not go far enuff but you can't argue that it is unnecessary or unwise.

Spud can continue if you like...

Be Well.

Haha!

Process doesn't mean squat. It didn't the 100 times Hastert used it, it didn't when Cantor voted his deem and pass, and it doesn't now. No one except for those that don't like Obama anyway, care. Anyway, Cantor's already acknowledged all this.

Yes, but then he got his ass handed to him at his own, televised healthcare "summit".

He then further marginalized himself with his FOX interview which made Palin's interview with Katie Couric look almost good by comparison.

Ah, Spud sees the problem here.

Obviously Jeff is living in some far-off bizzarro universe.

Wot's the moon made out of in yer universe, Jeff?

Be Well.

My favorite part of this "interview" is when Obama made his point, and Brett would immediately say "ok" then change the subject and go back to "process."

Yup, that was fun.

Spud's favorite part was when Bret the Human Haircut complained that Obama was filibustering.

/Spud's a huge fan of irony, doncha know! ^_^

Be Well.

Uh-huh and the National Enquirer outsells the NYT.

Does that mean the NE is the better news outlet?

A decent point but also apples and oranges. FOX is a superior news outlet to MSNBC by any measure.

Obama is gonna bring tens of millions of currently uninsured people under the umbrella of coverage at a 1% cost increase.

To quote Moneywar - "Bull Shit!"

You can argue that the Obama backed HC plan does not go far enuff but you can't argue that it is unnecessary or unwise.

Oh yes I can! For that matter, yes "We" can!

Danni, if it's so important to sell this great bill, why no publish it? Or does he think the Public is too stupid and wouldn't understand it? Both you and him are just spinning and not addressing the simple questions most people have.

The bill will be published today, once the CBO scores it. Until then, there is no bill. You knew that, right?

FOX is a superior news outlet to MSNBC by any measure.

Lawls! ^_^

Superior?

This word, you keep using this word...

Be Well.

Maybe the problem is when the President calls for an Up or Down Vote a week ago and then flip-flops in front of the American Public, he looks like a fool.
Of course you Lefties can't grasp the idea of Integrity or Consistancy.

Maybe the problem is when the President calls for an Up or Down Vote a week ago and then flip-flops in front of the American Public, he looks like a fool.

Of course you Lefties can't grasp the idea of Integrity or Consistancy.

So your faulty assumptions, interpretation and lack of knowledge is the fault of the President?

Everyone else's fault, and you're not responsible for being informed. You are a perfect Republican.

Yeah, let's please avoid all the good points about the actual legislation, because the GOP will lose on that.

And what would those be?

The acceleration of Medicare's bankruptcy?

How about the exploding deficits?

Doctors fleeing their profession if this is passed just when we are adding 30 million, or so, to the doles?

My favorite part of this "interview" is when Obama made his point, and Brett would immediately say "ok" then change the subject and go back to "process."

OK. We need Ben Nelson's vote - here's $100 million for him. Landrieu? $300 million. What, we have a lot of seniors in Fla. who don't like our Medicare Advantage cuts - well, you guys are exempt. Hmmm....Cadillac taxes ruffling some union feathers, well we can delay YOUR increase by 5-years - the rest of you can pony-up. What, Scott Brown fucked up our filibuster-proof majority? No worries, we can just invoke an obscure senate rule that was never intended to be invoked for a bill of this nature. Uh-oh, this bill is HUGELY unpopular? Let's propose some trivial ammendmens and in the process let's "deem" this shit passed without technically voting on it (the public isn't buying that shit and it'll actually prove worse than a somewhat more honest straight-up vote). Sweeping legislation and zero bi-partisanship? Fuck 'em. 75% of the public wants to scrap this shit and start over? Fuck them too.

Quite honestly, fuck YOU for trivializing all of this shit as it it's inconsequential, Yav. You point to similar GOP attrocities, which were FAR less-sweeping in terms of degree as justification for this criminal power-grab???

Fuck all of this. If this bill is SO great, drop the shenanigans and at least have a modicum of honor and let it pass or fail sans criminal dishonesty and trickery.

This word, you keep using this word...

Inconceivable!!!

Damn you!

You make me chuckle at the same moment when you are pissing me off!

Yav,

I apologize for the "fuck you" comment.

You have earned better over the years.

You just seriously pissed me off with your apparent shrug-off of the procedural issues, as if they are trivial.

Regardless, I shouldn't have given you the finger like I did - I am sorry about that.

Inconceivable!!!

Damn you!

^_^

You make me chuckle at the same moment when you are pissing me off!

Oddly enuff yer postage has a remarkably similar effect on the spuddish one.

/But Spud knows sommat you don't know.
//Spud isn't left handed!!

En Garde!!!!

Be Well.

/The Cliffs of Insanity are so pretty this time of year.

So your faulty assumptions, interpretation and lack of knowledge is the fault of the President?

#29 | Posted by YAV

What the hell are you talking about? If he says he wants an Up or Down vote, I shouldn't assume he wants an Up or Dow Vote? Christ, you make as much sense as he does.

What the hell are you talking about? If he says he wants an Up or Down vote, I shouldn't assume he wants an Up or Dow Vote? Christ, you make as much sense as he does.

The President has called for an up or down vote. The House determines how it will proceed. The bill will get a vote, up or down, whether the vote is two stage or one as in "deem and pass."

The argument is disingenuous. The GOP wants two votes so they can hang the vote "for" all the crap listed in Jeff's post #30 on the Dems, knowing none of it will be part of the final bill. They wish to ignore the reconciliation which strips all that out.

Personally I think the House should do two votes, but I don't care about the process. The result will be the same. The GOP will still hang the BS of post #30 on them either way and we'll get a bill without the corn-husker/florida/LA bs.

//Spud isn't left handed!!

That's only the half of it!

I also have a Polish last-name!

So, I am dumber and more awkward than the dumb blonde chick but I can't even attract members of the opposite sex - at least the blonde chicks have the sex-appeal thing going for them!

On topic - I think this bill is a travesty. It, like the public option, is designed to make healthcare much worse as a justification for the end-goal which is single-payer. I think universal health-care is horribly-flawed. However, it is far better than what this bill produces.

While I certainly think an inremental, HSA-pincipled approach is optimal; if given the choice between this shit and universal/single-payer, I would choose the latter. This bill takes on almost all of the negatives of a universal system with only a fraction of the benefits.

Scrap it and start over - MORE government control is far better than this - and that is coming from a Libertarian conservative.

Sorry, should have quoted your part, WisGod (1st paragraph).

Mea culpa.

Jeff, OK.

The CBO numbers are out. The news is good for the Democrats and for America. The bill will now be posted.

The argument is disingenuous. The GOP wants two votes so they can hang the vote "for" all the crap listed in Jeff's post #30 on the Dems, knowing none of it will be part of the final bill.

There is no such guaruntee. All of that "shit" passed for a variety of reasons. Once the House either votes in favor of the senate bill or deems it passed, it can go straight to Obama for a signature. The only criminal bribe that is likely to be scrubbed is Nelson's deal - and that is only becuase his constituents were embarassed by it. The final bill will likely contain most of that unsavory shit. The house is forced to vote on this toxic senate bill and then HOPE that the senate will scrub the bill of teh bill of its corruption. Let's keep-in-mind that ONLY budgetary measures can be ammended in reconciliation. The abortion language stands as is.

My God! The Dems have painted themselves into one helluva corner. If they were to abandon this and IMMEDIATELY push for agreed-upon measures they would STILL have the ability to brag about being transformative. They are fighting a losing battle and they are squandering EVERY advantage they currently enjoy in order to try and pass a turd.

Give it up and either:

1. Go back to the Universal system

-or-
2. Proceed incrementally; adopt the HSA-model and keep it private.

IMO - these are the only 2 vialbe options. Everything else in the middle only makes matters worse.

Obviously, I favor #2 (I like taking dumps). But #1 is better than anything else other than status-quo.

#38 | Posted by YAV

Do the CBO numbers point out that the Medicare cuts either prolong Medicare viability OR contribute to deficit-neuatrality, but NOT BOTH?

Do the CBO numbers included projected tax increases? If so, it would be nice to see from who and how much. I know, pesky details that affect Mr. and Mrs. American Taxpayer.

Baird: Is Conneticut in?
Obama: What are you referring to?

While I certainly think an incremental, HSA-principled approach is optimal; if given the choice between this shit and universal/single-payer, I would choose the latter.

HSAs and tort reform (traditional RW solutions) are a part of the solution to HC reform but they are not the end all and be all that some RWers like to think they are.

Single Payer and Universal coverage are optimal alongside waste and fraud management that includes real penalties to those found to be gaming the system.

See also: Breaking up the virtual monopolies and better drug pricing due to national level bargaining.

Be Well.

/Btw, for the record, Spud actually is left handed IRL but in order to make that PB reference work Spud sed otherwise.

#39 | Posted by JeffJ

My point being - once this is signed into law, Obama, Pelosi and Reid achieved their goal - passing some form of massive-government legislation, no matter how shitty it is - and it IS shitty. At the point of passage...ahem....deem-age, where is the motivation to "clean-up" a toxic piece of legislation that would likely fail under any further legislation?

Btw, for the record, Spud actually is left handed IRL but in order to make that PB reference work Spud sed otherwise.

#43 | Posted by dethspud

Never admit to being left-handed - it's obvious troll-bait.

Arrogance:
: an attitude of superiority manifested in an overbearing manner or in presumptuous claims or assumptions

"If you vote against my healthcare bill, you are against healthcare reform and for the status quo."

Never admit to being left-handed - it's obvious troll-bait.

Feh, Spud aint afraid of no trolls.

Spud's a loud and proud lefty.

Spud's here.
No fear.
Get used to it!

Be Well.

/That all noted Spud has managed to stay awake fer over 24 hours again.
//A really bad habit is that.
///Will prolly drift off soonish as ya do
stage left.

I wanted Brit to ask him when Hawaii had an earthquake.

some of you apparently have no clue about hard breaks and time on national newscast
bret couldnt allow the asshole to FILABUSTER on the dem talking points which was all the liar was doing

and as stoddard said on panel after...barry had never seemed so uncomforatable or on the defensive

well baby..thats because he FINNALY got some hard questions about it from someone who didnt just give him air time to LIE and bullshit about it..

and as krauthammer correctly put it

it was a 'clever rope a dope' move....

on the THIRD time asked about the double counting LIE from goddamn dems...barry finnaly said something about 'donut' hole on medicine which was later to be shown as a lie in the program..so of course bret had to interupt...

AND he said neither HE nor bret knew what was in the bill and then started to tell us the truth about the bill ????

so mister president..if you dont know whats in it, how can you know whats in it??????

the dick also said that if you oppose this you are for the status quo and thats another FUCKIN LIE From the president ...

BUT maybe the biggest pile of shit off all

"have mobilized the world community ...succesfully...to isolate Iran.."

what the fuck??? so they are under pressure now to stop the bomb building....what a fuckin liar.

In Obama's first ever "real" interview, he was stuttering so bad Baier had to keep things moving along.

the pres did NOT have a good day did he?

on the defensive the whole time when it was apparent the he couldnt rattle on the same old filabuster talking points...
and I ask once more..he said that neither one of them knew what was in it...so why did the interview even continue???

oh later he told us that we werent getting the truth about it..what?????

Never allowing Obama to finish a sentence the interview was obviously frustrating for both men. Who won? Depends on who you talk to.

Therein lies the problem. Who won?

This was a contest? Did there have to be a WINNER?

No, this was supposed to be an interview not the interrogation of a "suspect". Fox News should have allowed for the POTUS to take as long as he liked to answer each and every question.

This is not a game of "Gotcha!".

How rude it was to continually interrupt the President like that.

Fucs Snooze shows its true color once again.

RED

BUT maybe the biggest pile of shit off all...

is afkbuttlicker2

No, this was supposed to be an interview not the interrogation of a "suspect". Fox News should have allowed for the POTUS to take as long as he liked to answer each and every question.
Posted by donnerboy

They could have gave him a six year contract, and that talking point fool wouldn't have answered a damned thing. Fucking Axlerod has more polish.

"The bill will get a vote, up or down, whether the vote is two stage or one as in "deem and pass." "

It sets plausible deniability, technically they never voted for the bill.

Obama, and Yav, are committing intellectual dishonesty.

Obama, and Yav, are committing intellectual dishonesty.

You occasionally offer a point, but I've noticed that's becoming less and less frequent. Let's be blunt: you want to talk process, ignoring everything your party's done and ignoring the benefits that this bill will yield. It's completely understandable in your position because you got nothing.

Obama, and Yav, are committing intellectual dishonesty.

#58 | Posted by AndreaMackris

And the Sun will rise and set tomorrow.

Boy, FoxNews sure made itself look bad in this interview. From here on out, who can blame any Democrat for refusing to go on that rabidly rightwing tv station?

I wouldn't blame them or want them to until they can say "yes" or "no". Pretty fucking simple.

Right-wing world:

iowntheworld.com

Reality:

I'm very happy for you, Mr. President, and Imma let you finish, but My interview With President Bush was one of the best of all time!

-Bret "kanye" Baier

OF ALL TIME!

I would think that Obama's interview with Baier was an example of the adversarial role the press should play with all presidents, but then I remember Fox's treatment of the WMD in Iraq issue and its complete abdication of scrutiny of the Medicare Part D fiasco.

In the first example they were merely jingoistic cheerleaders, and in the second they just ignored it.

Betel- I have no problem with adversarial. However, the total lack of respect for the POTUS disturbs me. Doubly so, since it's partisan hackery at the heart of it.

One can be confrontational and ask tough questions without being a rude dick. Bush's Teddy Baier obviously can't...with a dem.

having read thru about 1/2 of the posts (without more than a little retching), let me try this.

First, only granting 15 minutes for an interview to cover a subject as large and complex as this is foolish (or intended).

Second, rambling on in professor mode, as opposed to reasonable answers, was done to prevent any information being passed on.

Third, interrupting the president while he is rambling and unresponsive is in bad taste.

I realize that Fox was hoping to get a good interview, and the pres was hoping to not give a bad interview... and they both failed.

The biggest losers (outside of the partisans on sites like this) are the people, who didn't get a fair and honest question and answer session on the health care issue.

I realize that Fox was hoping to get a good interview, and the pres was hoping to not give a bad interview... and they both failed.
newsworthy flag

This illustrates fairly well how much you can trust the Republic, um, Government....

LWers: Bret interrupted so often Obama was unable to answer the question.

#2 | Posted by dethspud

Obama lost because he lied.

He went on saying that the bill was very simple and shouldn't affect anyone who has insurance now...

Why is it cost so much then?

Why not just pass a simple bill that insurance companies have to cover everyone?

Because it's far more complicated than that.

In short, Obama is losing because he doesn't realize that this issue must be taken up at the state level. That's the only way we are going to "reform Health Care"...

You're correct, there's no "winner." You're correcter that Fox is not a "news" outlet at all. The biggest point is ignored. Would George Dubya have conceded to an interview by Maddow or Olbermann? herm

The biggest point is ignored. Would George Dubya have conceded to an interview by Maddow or Olbermann? herm

Good point. Considering it was Fox, Obama went into the interview already on the defense, expecting to be taken out of context, so he wanted to be as clear as possible. To Obama, being clear means lots of words.

The Fox interviewer went into the interview looking to score points and make a name for himself among the Fox fans; maybe even get his own show, and forgot the President deserves respect when you are interviewing him. I hated Bush, but, if I met him, it would still be "yes sir; no sir; thank you Mr. President; etc." The OFFICE deserves respect always.

Boy, FoxNews sure made itself look bad in this interview. From here on out, who can blame any Democrat for refusing to go on that rabidly rightwing tv station?

#61 | Posted by moder8

oh please...

there was a great comparison this AM...
clip of GIBBS talking about it saying that the pres should have been allowed to answer..ie...filabuster and waste time for actual ANSWERS To the questions..

the comparison is that if you watch any white house press breifing at all you will see the same NON ANSWERS from this poorest press secrty in my lifetime.

AND IF the black ass kissing media were to ask questions like this earlier, there may not even BE a president obama.

the student lone was tossed into this health bill,hell why not toss in cap and trade,illegals the kitchen sink and any other dem.wish list that over half the country dosen't want.

AND IF the black ass kissing media were to ask questions like this earlier, there may not even BE a president obama.

The people to blame for a President Obama are, in order:

1. Bush for being Dubya
2. McCain for picking Palin as his running mate
3. Palin for speaking
4. Bush for leaving behind what he did so nobody really wanted to win
5. Clinton for being Hillary
6. The media for being cheerleaders
7. The voters (myself included) for looking at Change and never asking "change of what to what?"

I saw a bumper sticker on a car in Miami shortly after Obama won that made me realize #7. It said "Remember That Cuba Picked Change in 1959."

Spud's "Interupt-a-thon" thread got the greenlight at the end of the blog pier?

Woo Hoo!

* does happy dance *

the student lone was tossed into this health bill...

The Lone Student?

As opposed to wot?

The Lone Gunman on the grassy knoll?

The Lone Wolf?

The Lone Ranger?

Be specific, man!

Be Well.

kanrei..I have to honestly add to that, the gop having the 'power' from 2000 t0 2006 and not using it for many many things...

the gop having the 'power' from 2000 t0 2006 and not using it for many many things...

They used it for all the wrong things.

no I dont agree with that...they should have gotten through things that would have kept barney and his buddies hands away from mae and mac with real reform there perhaps

things like that....for instance...as well as..YES>..coming up with REAL health care reform and not this nonsense...

HOLY BATMAN

is this US talking like this????

BUT REMEMBER one of teddys last regrets was NOT taking the gop health care inititive in the 90's..
so I guess if he wasnt so caught up in PARTY OVER COUNTRY at that time...things might have been different

90's...or was it earlier...

The fact is with this health care debacle a lot of indefensible things have occurred. The MSM has utterly failed to call out this administration and the Dems over it. Baier pressed Obama on this and he clearly wasn't prepared to deal with it.

I understand and agree to a point that the interruptions were annoying and a bit disrespectful; however EVERY answer contained the same rhetoric - Obama was repeating himself a lot. Baier was trying to get in as many questions as possible and, somewhat disrespectfully, cut Obama off on a few occasions.

Having said all of that, can those of you who are critical of Baier's handling of all of this please point out which questions that he asked that weren't legitimate questions.

Baier pressed Obama on this and he clearly wasn't prepared to deal with it.

Baier had his marching orders which were to try and bog Obama down in talk about the process of how this bill was cobbled together and how it is being passed.

Obama gave short shrift to his obvious agenda and stayed on track talking about the benefits of the HC reforms being passed.

Deal with it.

Be Well.

The reason obama had to repeat himself was because baier dismissed everything he said and tried to force a different topic. if baier actually listened, them proposed a different topic, maybe they could of had a reasonable discussion. the reason why obama didn't do the same is because baier would never let the topic stray from the pre-determined talking points that seemed to be pushed every time he uttered a word.

Obama gave short shrift to his obvious agenda and stayed on track talking about the benefits of the HC reforms being passed.

Deal with it.

Translation: Obama didn't want to talk about process, which a great deal of Americans are genuinely concerned about, so he deflected away to his non-specific rhetoric.

Deal with it.

The process and the substance are married.

The reason the process has been so ugly is because the substance is so ugly.

Americans are highly disturbed by the process and deserve answers. Obama doesn't want to give the answers.

At this point, to the Dems, the substance isn't even THAT important anymore. They don't care that this is an awful bill. They just want to pass something big, no matter how shitty. It's all politics as Obama groveling that they need to pass this bill in order to save his presidency.

obama is not directly in charge of the process, he believes in what the bill will do. he is part of the executive branch, not the legislative. if fox wants to talk about process they should talk to representatives that are in control of it.

It's all politics as Obama groveling that they need to pass this bill in order to save his presidency.

Which is the exact reasons Dennis K and Michael M gave for their support. Both have said that this is a bad bill, but, if it fails, then so does Obama and they want to empower him.

A typical liberal "debate" technique is to talk louder, talk over, and talk around the debate when they don't like the topic, or question. Very standard liberal stupidity, where the idea does not hold water and cannot hold it's own.

A typical liberal "debate" technique is to talk louder, talk over, and talk around the debate when they don't like the topic

A typcial conservative "debate" technique is to attack the patriotism of the other speaker when they don't like the topic.

They don't care that this is an awful bill. They just want to pass something big, no matter how shitty. It's all politics as Obama groveling that they need to pass this bill in order to save his presidency.

and perhaps some of their own seats.

But to be fair to Dennis K....at least he calls the bill what it is.

Obama is not directly in charge of the process, he believes in what the bill will do. he is part of the executive branch, not the legislative. if fox wants to talk about process they should talk to representatives that are in control of it.

THIS.

QFT.

The reason the process has been so ugly is because the substance is so ugly.

No the primary reasons the process has been so ugly have been the obstructionist Republicans and the Big Insurance lobby.

Palin-Americans are highly disturbed by the process...

FTFY.

Be Well.

No the primary reasons the process has been so ugly have been the obstructionist Republicans and the Big Insurance lobby.

Funny how the enemy has changed. I thought it was the Pharmaceuticals companies that were driving up costs. Remember drug importation debate?

even if the pharmaceutical companies drive up the cost, they might not be a major obstruction is the process. i really don't know enough about their role in this to be sure. can someone link me to some info.

No the primary reasons the process has been so ugly have been the obstructionist Republicans and the Big Insurance lobby.

The "obstructionist" Republicans are in such a minority that they haven't mattered in this whole deal and the Dems treated them as such. As for 'the Big Insurance lobby', pro-Obamacare advertising exceeded anti-Obamacare advertising 4-to-1, with $150 million coming from "Big Pharma" on behalf of Obamacare. Not to mention the enormous bully-pulpit that Obama has enjoyed through all of this with a fawning and uncritical legacy media echoing his bullshit.

You are making bullshit excuses for the inexcusable. The GOP wasn't behind any of the bribes that occurred (Cornhusker kickback, union Cadillac exemption, Louisana purchase, Gatorade, Connecticut Connection, North Dakota donation, etc, etc.). All of this shit falls squarely on the shoulders of the DNC - quit being an apologist, it is very unbecoming.

if fox wants to talk about process they should talk to representatives that are in control of it.

Obama has driven this initiative from the start and, as the leader of his party, should be equipped to at least comment on the process. But, per usual, he and his supporters play the blame-game.

obama gave congress reign on the bill after he promoted the idea. he only stepped in after they failed to accomplish anything because the GOP used every tactic they could to stall it in congress. the dems could have done better at pushing it through, but they wanted to use moderation and try to reason with the GOP. that failed as the GOP changed their minds whenever dems tried to appease them. that is obstruction. even after obama stepped in it was pelosi who was in charge of getting the bill to pass. obama has only promoted what the bill will do when it passes and has made no attempt to force it through himself.

Which is the exact reasons Dennis K and Michael M gave for their support. Both have said that this is a bad bill, but, if it fails, then so does Obama and they want to empower him.

#93 | Posted by kanrei at 2010

report out of dc is that OBAMA told the hispanic caucaus that his presidency was on the line and as buener said

mister president...this is NOT about you..
but then when you are a narcistist ..EVERYTHING is about you...

#101 | Posted by NotMyRealName

Does your real name end with "Gibbs"?

The GOP has been completely shut out of the process. Fine - the Dems won fair and square. But to blame the GOP for this is beyond laughable, it is pathetic.

the dems could have done better at pushing it through, but they wanted to use moderation and try to reason with the GOP.

Uh huh. The GOP has been completely shut out of this since April. The Dems chose to go it alone. They own this steaming pile of crap 100%.

Brett's question of this bill's passage (or not) affecting Obama's legacy. Obama adroitly countered that his concern wasn't his legacy, but the well-being of the people he was elected to represent - it was a strong answer.
#9 | Posted by JeffJ

that seem like words from a narcissist.

read this article.

Obama tried to not answer direct questions and he was called out on it as he should have been. Everybody knows his views and this just shined a huge light on them. He wants his agenda crammed through no matter how it is done.

have you read any of the other posts? he is not part of the legislative branch. he did not, does not, or will not push the bill in any way besides trying to explain the benefits. he tried to do that on fox, but they simply tried to force the process, which he is not a part of, on him and make him responsible. you can blame him all you want, but he does not control everything, no matter how much you want him do so you can blame all the problems in america on him.

if you have an example where he was directly involved in the process please tell me.

have you read any of the other posts? he is not part of the legislative branch.

That's a fair point, on its face - seperation of powers and all that.

However, that does not give him an excuse to tacitly defend the indefensible, and since this has been a Dem-only process it is perfectly reasonable to pin him down on this attrocious process and all of the criminalities evidenced therein.

Also, he still ultimately has to sign this bill into law. If he gave a shit about the corruption he could have threatened veto at any point in order to hold his party to a standard even remotely akin to what he campaigned on. But no. He has encouraged this shit at every step.

-this attrocious process and all of the criminalities evidenced therein.

Legislation virgin, eh?

Always been done exactly this way.

Always been done exactly this way.

Exactly???

I don't think so.

And going further, you'd be going absolutely apeshit if the GOP were doing this shit - and that would be on a much smaller bill that actually enjoyed public support.

he does support the bill, that is not what i am arguing. i am saying that he was not directly involved with the process that is current going on in the house and congress to pass it. from what i have seen of the interview, that is what baier was pushing. i only saw the clip, if the rest of the interview portrays something different, then please link it.

supporting it and being part of it is not the same thing. whether you like the bill or not should not change that fact.

-I don't think so.

I'll hit you so hard you'll be looking for your shoes for weeks, you cross-dressing Pollock!!- Frank "Corky" Cotton

Of course it has always been done this way in Congress. Back room deals, special earmarks for votes.... hell, it's not nearly as seedy now as it used to be.... at least now we find out about it.

he does support the bill, that is not what i am arguing. i am saying that he was not directly involved with the process that is current going on in the house and congress to pass it

go sell that somewhere else. You are attempting to remove Obama from what is going on in congress?

complete bullshit. Look at what happened with Dennis K. Obama was all about that change.

i was just trying to say that the entire interview should not have been on the process. after doing some more research i found he has been more active than what i implied. both sides tried to deflect on issues they wanted to talk about without trying to understand the other. obama is not guiltless, but he did not personally push this through himself.

Palin-Americans are highly disturbed ...

there much better!

FTFY.

Be Well

-Donnerdude

Bret handed the assclown his ass on national t.v.. He had the dunce and thief totally running for cover. obama is truly a lying piece of marxist shit.
Is it any wonder that the American fore-fathers gave us a second amendment, we clearly see why.

Tutamen Deus

Is it any wonder that the American fore-fathers gave us a second amendment, we clearly see why.

Tutamen Deus

* strike chilling chord *

You pants-pissing wingnuts mumbling into yer shoes and alluding to some neo-revolution to come are simply frakkin' ADORABLE!

Don't fergit to put the safety on them guns you cling to every night when you go to bed.

Otherwise the terorists and the black helicopters win!

Be Well.

Barry can't handle the heat as was a stammering fool as he kept repeating the Lib's talking points. Brett did his best to get the POTUS back on topic but had a very tough time.

Barry could be heard murmering "where's my teleprompter?"

Is it any wonder that the American fore-fathers gave us a second amendment, we clearly see why.

To protect us from overbearing govt. But don't worry, those of us who believe in the 2nd amendment would protect libbies from crazy right wing govts as well.

Don't fergit to put the safety on them guns you cling to every night when you go to bed.

And you libbies don't fergit to put out the crack pipes at the end of the night, hate to have you killed in a house fire cause you were to fucked up the climb out of your mom's basement.

"hate to have you killed in a house fire cause you were to fucked up the climb out of your mom's basement."

Ya gotta love the self-retorting retort.

Oh, I thought it was a fair balance to warning people to put guns on safety before snuggling up with them.

But maybe fair and balanced isn't something people on this site are familiar with.

the united states is a country that is now decimated by it's own disgusting vomit!

That added a lot.

Always been done exactly this way.

#111 | Posted by Corky at 2010

YES!!!

AND NOW THE vaunted CORKY comes out in favor of wiretaps and waterboarding of suspected terrorists.

ALL RIGHT>>good for you bro....