Obama's list: Calling the questioners

This seems a bit like the mood that has taken over America lately........where's mine? Here we have the talk shows talking about "over exposure", and others not enough.

Interesting how you focus on Obama's list when Bush was notorious for doing the same thing and, while you mentioned it here, I don't recall a specific story about it when he was president. Still pretty right leaning, huh?

Calling on the Washington Times was a big message of outreach to wavering conservatives.

That the goofy reporter took the opportunity to disrespect the president was unfortunate...

http://www.political-buzz.com/

The president called on Fox News, Politico and the very conservative Washington Times. He did not seem to be trying to avoid questions from media outlets that have been very critical of his attempts to right the economy.

I liked the fact that he called on reporters from radio and "Stars and Stripes" and other smaller outlets. In any case, the whole nation got to hear the questions and the answers, so he wasn't hiding anything from the voters.

I admit that he didn't call on the TRIB. Is that the real point of the article?

Why is the "lead" necessarily determined by what is written in the major circulation newspapers? Everything that comes out of the president's mouth is potentially a lead, whether the big newspapers like it or not.

He called on Fox News, CNN, and The Washington Times. So where do you get, "navigated his way through a carefully scripted list of special-interest publications all but ensuring that he wouldn't encounter a question big enough to trump his own story: His message about the necessity of passing his budget?"
Give me a break. He called on interests unfriendly to him, in general, and you want to accuse him of dodging any questions "big enough to trump his own story?" Take up your beef with Fox News and The Washington Times.

Do the big boys feel slighted that they did not get picked? It seemed as if Obama uses a list that includes "lesser" media people that would have been ignored in the past. There is nothing wrong with that. And, the questions asked were not exactly softball questions.

Obama did fine with the American public which is what the news conference was all about-a status report to the American people without reporters acting as middle men in the news conduit. The reporters for the most part ask uninformed questions such as 'why didn't you get angry sooner" so they were nothing more than props. Obama had a mission and he met his objectives.

Perhaps if "Allison" ever learns to read beyond her ideology, she'll see that during Bush's presidency, it was often acknowledged that he, like ALL presidents before him (pick up a book once in a while, Allison) had a "scripted" roll of questioners to call on; the point, which Allison exposes herself by not acknowledging, was that Bush had the confidence at least to freelance, offering the opportunity for questions of a broader nature that might actually deliver some substance, while Obama continues, as he did throughout the campaign, to be terrified of answering a real question- or even taking one.

He really didn't answer any questions. After a brief acknowledgement of the question he went back into his (probably) prepared tautology of the need to address healthcare and other items to bring the fiscal crisis under control. His comparison of Bush's deficits to his own were incredulous. He refused to answer the direct question of whether he would accept a budget that did not include cap and trade and increased taxes.

Mark, I recall when you wrote about Florida politics. Why won't you let me post?

Did anyone catch President Giggles seemingly endorse a flat tax system with his oblique example of a bus driver vs. a rich person's charitable tax donations?

He seemingly made the arguement for a flat tax system whereby rich people and bus drivers alike would be granted the same percentage deduction.

Does he even realize this?

Yes, finally he said something that I can agree with. You go President Giggles!

The Obama Deception is a hard-hitting film that completely destroys the myth that Barack Obama is working for the best interests of the American people.

The Obama phenomenon is a hoax carefully crafted by the captains of the New World Order. He is being pushed as savior in an attempt to con the American people into accepting global slavery.

We have reached a critical juncture in the New World Order’s plans. It’s not about Left or Right: it’s about a One World Government. The international banks plan to loot the people of the United States and turn them into slaves on a Global Plantation.

Covered in this film: who Obama works for, what lies he has told, and his real agenda. If you want to know the facts and cut through all the hype, this is the film for you.

Watch The Obama Deception and learn how:

- Obama is continuing the process of transforming America into something that resembles Nazi Germany, with forced National Service, domestic civilian spies, warrantless wiretaps, the destruction of the Second Amendment, FEMA camps and Martial Law.

- Obama’s handlers are openly announcing the creation of a new Bank of the World that will dominate every nation on earth through carbon taxes and military force.

- International bankers purposefully engineered the worldwide financial meltdown to bankrupt the nations of the planet and bring in World Government.

- Obama plans to loot the middle class, destroy pensions and federalize the states so that the population is completely dependent on the Central Government.

- The Elite are using Obama to pacify the public so they can usher in the North American Union by stealth, launch a new Cold War and continue the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan.

The information contained in this film is vital to the future of the Republic and to freedom worldwide. President Barack Obama is only the tool of a larger agenda. Until all are made aware, humanity will remain captive to the masters of the New World Order.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw

Did anyone catch President Giggles seemingly endorse a flat tax system with his oblique example of a bus driver vs. a rich person's charitable tax donations?

He seemingly made the arguement for a flat tax system whereby rich people and bus drivers alike would be granted the same percentage deduction.

Does he even realize this?

Yes, finally he said something that I can agree with. You go President Giggles!

was that Bush had the confidence at least to freelance, offering the opportunity for questions of a broader nature that might actually deliver some substance, while Obama continues, as he did throughout the campaign, to be terrified of answering a real question- or even taking one.

Posted by: One of 54 Million | March 25, 2009 10:07 AM

Wow...you made that whole comparison after a whole 64 days. Seems fair to me.......
Maybe you could tell me how many pressers did Bush have in his first 64 days?

There's nothing new about President's having a preset list of questioners...or were you asleep during all the Bush press conferences. I just took as the president giving the little guys a chance. The bigger question is...this is news. Obama delivered another knockout performance whatever those on the right want to believe. I watched it with my brother and sister in law who happened around and are both rock solid Republicans. They were impressed in spite of themselves and don't think the Henry slapdown wasn't seen and appreciated. My sil said John Houseman in the paper chase. Whatever the more deranged posters here think the country loves this guy.

"I've got a little list...
They'd none of them be missed..."

Collapse of newspapers and corporate control of networks means easier control of "news".

Whether or not I agree with the one in control at the moment.

I think he is spooked by the fact they he may have to "freelance" some answers, if that was what one would call them. He either ignored some very good questions or others he just "muddled" through presenting talking points from the WH propaganda. His budget and deficit numbers do not add up and any informed American knows this but he continues with the misleading WH rosary growth projections that most blue-chip economists reject. It was campaign generalities with less than honest answers but as one can see by the posts the ignorant herd loves him. He had a couple of good moments but they were lost in all the doublespeak. The high point was the CNN dude getting the "death stare" followed by a rather dismissive answer. Shades of don't question my authority. The real Obama may be only able to read and present a good speech otherwise he appears in over his head.

I think it just reflects how little influence newspapers have anymore.

Chris, that wasn't his point at all. Obama's point is that the average American, when they donate money to a charity or their church/synagogue/mosque, receive a 29 percent deduction. If you make a lot more than the average you currently get considerably more, as if their donation is more valuable than mine. They are simply changing the rate so that its equitable.

My, my--such harsh critics. So Obama didn't take any hard questions??? IF that's what you truly believe, blame it on the ones asking the questions.
Obama took questions on a variety of topics from a variety of people.
Of course, there are some of you that are never going to be pleased no matter what Obama does. Too bad for you, it's going to be a long 4 years. Get used to it.

Mr Obama is very good at responding to questions that are critical of his policies. I frankly thinks he makes his points best when he is responding to a critic. Apparently Obama's critics think he is afraid to answer questions. They recognize a fear that is not apparent to me. He seems to enjoy being challenged and nor frightened by it. If asked what distinguishes President 43 from President 44, it is how they respond when they are challenged.

I'm sure Mark Silva is wondering why he has yet to be called on. I mean, Silva is perhaps Obama's biggest apologizer in the White House press corps and even works for the president and Silva's good friend David Axelrod as a PR agent.

Actually, Mark no longer covers the White House as a beat reporter, John D. And he works for and is paid by Tribune Publishing. So your entire posting is untrue.

Donut,

Don't let facts get in your way of a chance to smear Mark Silva.

Also, since you are apparently an editor, we would appreciate it if you would rewrite your post with proper punctuation.

And when the US Government owns the Tribune, as some are trying to "save" newspapers with federal money, we will see what type of news we do get. Of course, the Tribune won't cahnge much, yet . . . . .

Obama did as he has done since he started campaigning to be the Democratic nominee for president. He read off the teleprompter and when he had to answer questions he woodenly recited memorized talking points. Then CNN's Ed Henry asked the president why he hadn't gone public with his "outrage" over the bonuses earlier? and Obama answered, "It took a couple of days because I like to know what I'm talking about before I speak."...But the real question should have been to ask why Obama delegated the writiing of this legislation to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and why this trillion $ bill is so full of pork barrel spending and lacks any vision or new direction. Obama shouldn't have been blindsided by the inclusion of millions and millions of dollars of bonuses. He should have been there at the outset, shaping the tone and content of the legislation, and paying attention to important details. But he doesn't understand what happened to the economy and he understands even less how to fix it. He passed this problem off to others to solve, and he wants them to present a 'fix' to him 'un fait accompli' with a nice little teleprompter speech that he can stand up and deliver.

Obama said a lot of words last night, but he had the typical teleprompter delivery, rising and falling with each screen change, completely oblivious as to what was coming next.

I don't think he understands very much at all. He just wants the Presidential Seal and adulation. For him, getting elected was the end of the process, not the beginning, and I don't think he's either prepared or willing to put in the hard work needed.