Barack Hussein Obama owned by Bret Baier [VIDEOS]

[DaddyHalbucks]

Barack Hussein Obama owned by Bret Baier [VIDEOS]

https://youtube.com/watch?v=HFWHlry2pNA

https://youtube.com/watch?v=1MUc2TAe9Og

[theking]

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks

Barack Hussein Obama owned by Bret Baier [VIDEOS]

https://youtube.com/watch?v=HFWHlry2pNA

https://youtube.com/watch?v=1MUc2TAe9Og

The interviewer was trying to push his agenda...by constantly interrupting...and the President would not allow that and answered his way by pushing his agenda. If there was any ownage it was done by the President.

[mozadek]

Yeah, he really owned Obama.

[Fire]

Originally Posted by theking

The interviewer was trying to push his agenda...by constantly interrupting...and the President would not allow that and answered his way by pushing his agenda. If there was any ownage it was done by the President.

HMMM.. Interviewer is supposed to ask questions. Interviewee rambles on and doesn't answer so interviewer restates his question.

The 25K people watching the edited version on MSNBC will think the President was fabulous. But the 3.0 million that saw the whole interview will know that he ..........!

[theking]

Originally Posted by Fire

HMMM.. Interviewer is supposed to ask questions. Interviewee rambles on and doesn't answer so interviewer restates his question.

The 25K people watching the edited version on MSNBC will think the President was fabulous. But the 3.0 million that saw the whole interview will know that he ..........!

Interviewer asks questions the way he chooses to...interviewee answers the question the way he chooses to...interviewer interrupts asks the question again...the interviewee once again answers the question the way he chooses to...set and match to interviewee.

[TheSenator]

LOL....My farts just LULz

[epitome]

Does it pain you too much to say President Obama? Do you like that he has Hussein in his name? Did you call President Bush George W. Bush or just President Bush? If a "liberal media" reporter showed disrespect like that to any other President, would you have been cool with it?

Just curious.

[dig420]

Also it's funny how Beier wanted to talk only about the specific process being used to pass the health care bill, a process used by Repugnicans under Bush dozens of times, as if it was some dastardly thing Obama just created, and he also wouldn't let Obama actually talk about health care.

Deeply disrespectful on Beier's part and a wasted opportunity for him also. He had a once in a lifetime chance to interview the POTUS on prime-time TV and wasted by trying to hammer him with this week's Republitard squawking point.

[ninavain]

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks

Barack Hussein Obama owned by Bret Baier [VIDEOS]

https://youtube.com/watch?v=HFWHlry2pNA

https://youtube.com/watch?v=1MUc2TAe9Og

FOX news once again, looked stupid

[nation-x]

These so called conservatives are not concerned with how Bret Baier treated the interview as a political debate by making and stating talking points and not letting President Obama answer the questions... all they are concerned with is that they liked that Bret Baier disrespected President Obama over and over through the whole interview... even though none of them could have answered questions from an interviewer acting like that either. I think it speaks volumes that President Obama kept his cool... because if most of us got treated like that we would lose our cool.

[nation-x]

Originally Posted by dig420

Also it's funny how Beier wanted to talk only about the specific process being used to pass the health care bill, a process used by Repugnicans under Bush dozens of times, as if it was some dastardly thing Obama just created, and he also wouldn't let Obama actually talk about health care.

Deeply disrespectful on Beier's part and a wasted opportunity for him also. He had a once in a lifetime chance to interview the POTUS on prime-time TV and wasted by trying to hammer him with this week's Republitard squawking point.

[xxweekxx]

Originally Posted by epitome

Does it pain you too much to say President Obama? Do you like that he has Hussein in his name? Did you call President Bush George W. Bush or just President Bush? If a "liberal media" reporter showed disrespect like that to any other President, would you have been cool with it?

Just curious.

just ignore that dumbass. he was used to calling them "niggas"

Now he has to call him President.. Still pains him..

Show some respect amigo.. his toes are more powerful than u..

[cykoe6]

Originally Posted by epitome

Does it pain you too much to say President Obama? Do you like that he has Hussein in his name? Did you call President Bush George W. Bush or just President Bush? If a "liberal media" reporter showed disrespect like that to any other President, would you have been cool with it?

Just curious.

That is quite a statement considering the myriad of ways that Bush was regularly disrespected, defamed and insulted by your freinds on the left.......... and still is on a regular basis.

For me personally, words cannot adequately express the disgust I feel for Obama.......... so I just call him Obama and leave it at that.

[RaiderCash_Dominik]

Fox idiots at its best.

[spazlabz]

Fox news simply illustrated that they have an agenda and oppose this administration regardless of the issue. The most disappointing thing here is the disrespect shown to the office of the Presidency. It does not matter who holds that office it is something special. GWB deserved to be shown respect when he was in office even if the reporter completely disagreed with his policies

This does not apply to us as the masses, we can say whatever we want about them (except threatening of course), but a 'reporter' should not allow his own personal political beliefs to cloud an interview. The regular fox viewers do not need it and the rest of the population view it as disrespectful and a bit of an outrage


spaz

[The Demon]

Originally Posted by nation-x

These so called conservatives are not concerned with how Bret Baier treated the interview as a political debate by making and stating talking points and not letting President Obama answer the questions... all they are concerned with is that they liked that Bret Baier disrespected President Obama over and over through the whole interview... even though none of them could have answered questions from an interviewer acting like that either. I think it speaks volumes that President Obama kept his cool... because if most of us got treated like that we would lose our cool.

The hell do you mean we're not concerned? Are all liberals in favor of generalizing, using illogical appeals, or are they just plain stupid?

[The Demon]

Originally Posted by cykoe6

That is quite a statement considering the myriad of ways that Bush was regularly disrespected, defamed and insulted by your freinds on the left.......... and still is on a regular basis.

For me personally, words cannot adequately express the disgust I feel for Obama.......... so I just call him Obama and leave it at that.

It's called the liberal double standard.

[The Demon]

Originally Posted by spazlabz

Fox news simply illustrated that they have an agenda and oppose this administration regardless of the issue. The most disappointing thing here is the disrespect shown to the office of the Presidency. It does not matter who holds that office it is something special. GWB deserved to be shown respect when he was in office even if the reporter completely disagreed with his policies

This does not apply to us as the masses, we can say whatever we want about them (except threatening of course), but a 'reporter' should not allow his own personal political beliefs to cloud an interview. The regular fox viewers do not need it and the rest of the population view it as disrespectful and a bit of an outrage


spaz

CNN and MSNBC did the exact same thing when Bush was in the office, and I doubt you people bitched. If you can't be objective, don't post.

[spazlabz]

Originally Posted by The Demon

CNN and MSNBC did the exact same thing when Bush was in the office, and I doubt you people bitched. If you can't be objective, don't post.

post proof or it didnt happen, show me where GWB gace MSNBC an interview


spaz

[Tom_PM]

The meaning of "owned" must have been updated to include just being a dick to the president. In that sense, he sure owned him good. rah rah rah.

[The Demon]

Originally Posted by spazlabz

post proof or it didnt happen, show me where GWB gace MSNBC an interview


spaz

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/...ncy/index.html

Not that it matters, considering my post was relating to how CNN and MSNBC handled Bush's interviews with their bias, just like Fox News is doing now. But there you go.

Btw, I absolutely love the "post proof or it didn't happen" logic. Bravo

[closer]

I just see a very rude interviewer who tries to make HIS points clear, that's not good journalism in my book

[The Demon]

Originally Posted by closer

I just see a very rude interviewer who tries to make HIS points clear, that's not good journalism in my book

He's making the conservatives look bad.

[spazlabz]

Originally Posted by The Demon

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/...ncy/index.html

Not that it matters, considering my post was relating to how CNN and MSNBC handled Bush's interviews with their bias, just like Fox News is doing now. But there you go.

Btw, I absolutely love the "post proof or it didn't happen" logic. Bravo

I said 'post proof or it didnt happen' because I do not believe GWB ever granted an interview to anyone at MSNBC. I could be wrong and would enjoy seeing an interview with the former President and MSNBC because I would love to see if they are as hypocritical as Fox

it does not matter to me who acted like a disrespectful fool while interviewing, I would not defend one interviewer using those tactics and attack another


spaz

[spazlabz]

Originally Posted by The Demon

He's making the conservatives look bad.

I think he is making the organization he works for look bad, not conservatives

[DaddyHalbucks]

Originally Posted by epitome

Does it pain you too much to say President Obama?

Yes, actually.

Originally Posted by epitome

Do you like that he has Hussein in his name?

No opinion. It is his name. I did not choose it for him.

Originally Posted by epitome

Did you call President Bush George W. Bush or just President Bush?

I called him GWB. Or sometimes just "Bushie."

Originally Posted by epitome

If a "liberal media" reporter showed disrespect like that to any other President, would you have been cool with it?

Finally, a real question! I didn't see an disrespect. I saw stonewalling and obfuscation by Obama. The media is supposed to ask tough probing questions! For many years the mainstream media has shirked its duties and treated Obama with kid gloves, and the disasterous situation we face today as a nation is a result.

Originally Posted by epitome

Just curious.

Bi/ curious --or just curious?

[fatfoo]

Interesting video. I wonder what will happen to the American health care system as the final result of all the changes.

[Vendzilla]

I watched the interview on FOX
For years all news outlets were liberal in nature
First conservatives got Rush Limbaugh on the Radio
Obama signed a letter asking his boss make him apologize for a statement
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,303569,00.html
http://members.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI...er-for-charity
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/dai...110.guest.html
I guess Obama doesn't like freedom of speech

Then Fox came to be and the liberals all complain like little children about it
What Fox does is bring up the stuff the President doesn't want the people to know about, that's why he didn't answer directly Baiers questions.
Fox reports what the other networks won't, that why they are the #1 news source on cable and that's why the president had to go on there to push his agenda

Bret Baier did a good job, Obama was suppose to be there for an interview, not a speech
As for the respect angle, Obama works for us, he isn't a monarch

[The Demon]

Venz, I partly agree with you and partly believe Baier should have given him time. It wasn't an objective interview.

[nation-x]

Originally Posted by The Demon

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/...ncy/index.html

Not that it matters, considering my post was relating to how CNN and MSNBC handled Bush's interviews with their bias, just like Fox News is doing now. But there you go.

Btw, I absolutely love the "post proof or it didn't happen" logic. Bravo

So do you consider this to be an unfair and biased article that you linked?

[The Demon]

Originally Posted by nation-x

So do you consider this to be an unfair and biased article that you linked?

No, spaz wanted proof that Bush was interviewed by CNN. I'll read it and tell you...

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by The Demon

Venz, I partly agree with you and partly believe Baier should have given him time. It wasn't an objective interview.

I think my biggest problem with the interveiw was that there were questions I wanted answered and all I got was campaign promises. When Bush got interveiwed, he gave answers if he knew them, given sometimes he didn't.

I don't know how Bret got thru that without wanting to bitch slap Obama

[The Demon]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

I think my biggest problem with the interveiw was that there were questions I wanted answered and all I got was campaign promises. When Bush got interveiwed, he gave answers if he knew them, given sometimes he didn't.

I don't know how Bret got thru that without wanting to bitch slap Obama

While I agree with all of this, it still doesn't give Baier a right to grill him. IF he gave him more time and Obama didn't offer anything legitimate, then we could really complain.

[nation-x]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

I think my biggest problem with the interveiw was that there were questions I wanted answered and all I got was campaign promises. When Bush got interveiwed, he gave answers if he knew them, given sometimes he didn't.

I don't know how Bret got thru that without wanting to bitch slap Obama

It wasn't an interview... it was "Here is a stupid talking point... now you have 10 seconds to respond before I interrupt you".

[epitome]

Originally Posted by cykoe6

That is quite a statement considering the myriad of ways that Bush was regularly disrespected, defamed and insulted by your freinds on the left.......... and still is on a regular basis.

For me personally, words cannot adequately express the disgust I feel for Obama.......... so I just call him Obama and leave it at that.

You have no idea where I sit or who my friends are. I'm pretty firmly in the middle and cannot stand the far left as much as I cannot stand the far right (OK, can tolerate the left more because they're usually not as cranky).

Calling him Obama is fine! I couldn't stand Bush but he was still President Bush to me, like it or not.

Just because someone doesn't like someone doesn't mean they have to be disrespectful.

One cannot call themselves a patriot or anything similar when they do not give the democratically elected President at least basic respect.

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by nation-x

It wasn't an interview... it was "Here is a stupid talking point... now you have 10 seconds to respond before I interrupt you".

UM, he asked questions, Obama didn't answer them, it was an interveiw

[nation-x]

Originally Posted by epitome

You have no idea where I sit or who my friends are. I'm pretty firmly in the middle and cannot stand the far left as much as I cannot stand the far right (OK, can tolerate the left more because they're usually not as cranky).

Calling him Obama is fine! I couldn't stand Bush but he was still President Bush to me, like it or not.

Just because someone doesn't like someone doesn't mean they have to be disrespectful.

One cannot call themselves a patriot or anything similar when they do not give the democratically elected President at least basic respect.

Originally Posted by George W. Bush from the CNN article The Demon linked

The election of Barack Obama is an historic moment for our country. There are a lot of people in America who did not believe they would ever see this day. It is good for our country that people have hope in the system and feel vested in the future and President-elect Obama has a great opportunity," Bush said. "I really do wish him all the best. I am just as American as he is American, and it is good for our country that the president succeeds.

[nation-x]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

UM, he asked questions, Obama didn't answer them, it was an interveiw

dude... you must be blind and deaf... he was trying to answer them but kept getting interrupted. Furthermore, half of the "questions" weren't even questions... they were talking points... some I have already pointed out to you in another thread. Show me a single real question (not a bullshit talking point) that Bret Baier asked that Obama didn't answer or attempt to answer?

[The Demon]

Nation, let's not pretend that Obama would have given us clear answers. He's the best at skirting issues. With that said, it still doesn't make what Baier did any more right.

[nation-x]

Originally Posted by The Demon

Nation, let's not pretend that Obama would have given us clear answers. He's the best at skirting issues. With that said, it still doesn't make what Baier did any more right.

So what you are saying is that I should judge Obama on the answers he might have given if he was asked real questions and allowed to answer them? I agree with you in part... Obama SHOULD be held accountable for his answers on real questions... however, half of the questions were about whether or not Obama supported the use of Deem and Pass with Baier asserting that there wouldn't be a vote (which is false because there has already been a vote on the Senate Bill and it passed and now they will vote on the Reconciliation bill). This Deem and Pass talking point is complete bullshit hypocrisy since the Republicans are the ones that got it legitimized in the courts... AND the fact that it is a mundane process in reality. The vote will be on the Reconciliation bill which adds President Obama's requested changes to the Senate Bill. IF the Reconciliation bill passes the Senate Bill is considered passed as well since they are basically tied together. This isn't a new procedure... both Reconciliation AND Deem and Pass have been used by Republicans MORE than Democrats (Reconciliation 16 out of 21-22 times, Deem and Pass 202 times since 1996)... thus the hypocrisy.

As far as the deals... Obama made it clear which "deals" they had decided to leave in and said very clearly that the rest are gone with the passage of the Reconciliation bill. Furthermore, Obama didn't make those deals in the first place... Reid and Pelosi did that to whip votes... believe me... Republicans do the same thing... why not ask Jim Bunning what deal he got from the Republican leadership for allowing the Unemployment Extensions to pass.

As far as the donut hole... Obama answered that question clearly.

Here is the transcript... http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,589589,00.html

[The Demon]

Originally Posted by nation-x

So what you are saying is that I should judge Obama on the answers he might have given if he was asked real questions and allowed to answer them? I agree with you in part... Obama SHOULD be held accountable for his answers on real questions... however, half of the questions were about whether or not Obama supported the use of Deem and Pass with Baier asserting that there wouldn't be a vote (which is false because there has already been a vote on the Senate Bill and it passed and now they will vote on the Reconciliation bill). This Deem and Pass talking point is complete bullshit hypocrisy since the Republicans are the ones that got it legitimized in the courts... AND the fact that it is a mundane process in reality. The vote will be on the Reconciliation bill which adds President Obama's requested changes to the Senate Bill. IF the Reconciliation bill passes the Senate Bill is considered passed as well since they are basically tied together. This isn't a new procedure... both Reconciliation AND Deem and Pass have been used by Republicans MORE than Democrats (Reconciliation 16 out of 21-22 times, Deem and Pass 202 times since 1996)... thus the hypocrisy.

As far as the deals... Obama made it clear which "deals" they had decided to leave in and said very clearly that the rest are gone with the passage of the Reconciliation bill. Furthermore, Obama didn't make those deals in the first place... Reid and Pelosi did that to whip votes... believe me... Republicans do the same thing... why not ask Jim Bunning what deal he got from the Republican leadership for allowing the Unemployment Extensions to pass.

As far as the donut hole... Obama answered that question clearly.

No, I'm saying Obama has been more full of shit than Bush, and hiding behind Baier's stupidity to try and claim that Obama would have given clear, legitimate answers. I'm saying that's a false notion.

[nation-x]

Originally Posted by The Demon

No, I'm saying Obama has been more full of shit than Bush, and hiding behind Baier's stupidity to try and claim that Obama would have given clear, legitimate answers. I'm saying that's a false notion.

read this again: I agree with you in part... Obama SHOULD be held accountable for his answers on real questions...

[The Demon]

Originally Posted by nation-x

read this again: I agree with you in part... Obama SHOULD be held accountable for his answers on real questions...

Then we have no disagreements about what Baier did.

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by nation-x

So what you are saying is that I should judge Obama on the answers he might have given if he was asked real questions and allowed to answer them? I agree with you in part... Obama SHOULD be held accountable for his answers on real questions... however, half of the questions were about whether or not Obama supported the use of Deem and Pass with Baier asserting that there wouldn't be a vote (which is false because there has already been a vote on the Senate Bill and it passed and now they will vote on the Reconciliation bill). This Deem and Pass talking point is complete bullshit hypocrisy since the Republicans are the ones that got it legitimized in the courts... AND the fact that it is a mundane process in reality. The vote will be on the Reconciliation bill which adds President Obama's requested changes to the Senate Bill. IF the Reconciliation bill passes the Senate Bill is considered passed as well since they are basically tied together. This isn't a new procedure... both Reconciliation AND Deem and Pass have been used by Republicans MORE than Democrats (Reconciliation 16 out of 21-22 times, Deem and Pass 202 times since 1996)... thus the hypocrisy.

As far as the deals... Obama made it clear which "deals" they had decided to leave in and said very clearly that the rest are gone with the passage of the Reconciliation bill. Furthermore, Obama didn't make those deals in the first place... Reid and Pelosi did that to whip votes... believe me... Republicans do the same thing... why not ask Jim Bunning what deal he got from the Republican leadership for allowing the Unemployment Extensions to pass.

As far as the donut hole... Obama answered that question clearly.

Here is the transcript... http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,589589,00.html

God I love it when a liberal defends a position saying it's OK to do it because the Republicans did it.
Because one side did it, doesn't make it right

[nation-x]

Originally Posted by The Demon

Then we have no disagreements about what Baier did.

We had already agreed that. You have been answering my responses to Vendzilla.

[stickyfingerz]

Originally Posted by nation-x

dude... you must be blind and deaf... he was trying to answer them but kept getting interrupted. Furthermore, half of the "questions" weren't even questions... they were talking points... some I have already pointed out to you in another thread. Show me a single real question (not a bullshit talking point) that Bret Baier asked that Obama didn't answer or attempt to answer?

Ya he obviously had no time to talk. Just enough time to fill a hot air balloon with enough hot air to take off. lol

[nation-x]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

God I love it when a liberal defends a position saying it's OK to do it because the Republicans did it.
Because one side did it, doesn't make it right

That is the only answer you could possibly give that would be correct... I would prefer that it were done correctly... but that just isn't possible in the current political environment... The Republicans have chosen to take the position of opposing EVERYTHING... including nominations that they vote unanimously to confirm after forcing a cloture vote to overcome a filibuster... so they even filibuster nominations and bills that they support. WTF?

[nation-x]

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Ya he obviously had no time to talk. Just enough time to fill a hot air balloon with enough hot air to take off. lol

Put your money where your mouth is... show me a real question that he didn't answer or attempt to answer.

[spazlabz]

Originally Posted by The Demon

No, spaz wanted proof that Bush was interviewed by CNN. I'll read it and tell you...

spaz wanted proof of MSNBC getting an interview with GWB, its a technical point but I would view MSNBC to be the progressive's version of Fox, not CNN


spaz

[The Demon]

Eh, I'd give it more leftist propaganda than CNN.