An arrogant Obama loses his cool and stares down reporter who called him out...

It's pretty apparent based upon your posts that the "goggles" coloring one's perspective on all they see are upon thine own head.

 

Doesn't surprise me...the man is garbage. He'll be defended by his cronies on this board no doubt. Closing Gitmo=Good...Pro Choice=Murder!

 

This whole thing is kind of like bashing an NBA player who shows up for a charity event for kids, but who refuses to be bothered by all the autograph hounds while he's there.

There's a time and a place for those questions. This wasn't it.

 

Wow... after seeing the video... what a non-issue. And absolutely light years apart from what the thread title suggests.

The question should be asked, and answered. But, this moment of non-confrontation is nothing.

 

Neither would I - that is just a symbolic gesture. The new era of openness has a lot more to do with the rollback of the Bush Cheney secrecy regulations....which is what occurred yesterday.

I'll go one better than your hypothetical about transparency - we had access to all this information for over 200 years prior to the BUsh-Cheney secrecy regime and the Republic did not dissolve - mind you in the modern era, most of this was during the cold war era with a massive nuclear armed rival hell- bent on taking us down....and yet we managed to survive. What does that tell you about the need for Bush-Cheney's secrecy regime?

 

Thanks for posting the video. It made me like Obama even more than I already did. Where was the "staredown"?

 

Yeah, I even backed up and went slowly and found no "staredown." I also found no loss of cool. I guess if you're making up thread titles, you may as well go for it.

Even so, jev5555 still shouldn't take ad hom shots at bigtexxx.

 

I think it's a legitimate question....how is Obama going to live up to his pledge? He promised us an end to these washington insiders and lobbyists, and yet here is a big lobbyist being appointed to a powerful position which it will be very hard for him to not have a conflict of interest.

He may be qualified for the job, and that's fine, but Obama should say that and address teh question. I want to know the answer.

I don't think Obama lost his cool or is arrogant though...and that's fine...but whether it's today or very soon, that question should be answered.

 

After watching the video it seems fine. If he answers that guys question than he's going to be asked 20 more questions and it will turn into a press conference.

I think he just wanted to build a relationship and get comfortable with them nothing more.

It's a great question to ask him though.

 

Hmm, the video tells the real truth.

What is the record for fail threads? Texxie surely has to be close by now.....

 

Wow, that reporter was being a super turd. Obama was taking the time to greet the reporters and he's trying to drill him. That's like asking Clyde Drexler if he thinks he's better than TMac at a Rockets fan party. Totally uncalled for, he didn't even have to be there.

 

Fine, I will concede the point that I already conceded, whatever Bush/Cheney were doing was probably unethical. It still doesn't follow that this is a new era of openness if we are going back to the regulations before the Bush Cheney White House. Only thing added would be the lobbyist regulations, which seem to have already been broken.

I guess my contention is that the wayhe's making it sound, he's going to keep no secrets (I believe he had a direct quote to that effect) in this White House. I think that would be terribly imprudent, and there is no way he's going to keep no secrets from us. If he wants to roll back the Bush/Cheney regulations, fine, but don't act like this is some wonderful innovation.

But like I said earlier, the only thing that would be new are the lobbyist regulations, and an ethics class they have to take, an ethics class which seems pretty standard stuff at any law school post Watergate. And as has been said, it seems like the lobbyist regulations are not being followed yet.

So in conclusion, this just seems like a lot of fluff. But hey, maybe that's exactly what's needed right now.

 

There must be another video out there because the one i just saw shows none of this.

 

Part of the playbook for bigtexxx and basso* is just having the thread title that tons of people can read but never see the innards of the thread, where the bogus idea is shredded. I still believe they are getting paid per thread title and receive these ideas from some national entity, which is pathetic.

* = Trader_Jorge was fired from this position?

 

The part in bold is all you really need to know. It's an article written by — surprise! — Politico, defending one of their own reporters after he looked bad on national television and attempting to recast their reporter as somewhat of a hero. It's self-promotion at its finest.

 

And there you have the Bush/Cheney mindset in a nutshell (pun intended).