• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama to reporter: 'Let me finish my answers' next time

What a child this man is. Thin skinned, and unwilling to be challenged in his answers to tough questions. In fact anyone remember during the campaign, reporters he didn't like the questions of somehow disappeared from the press pool?

This is a man that likes to 'control' the media and when he can't it rattles him. What a loser he is.

j-mac

Didn't Bush do the same things with reporters? People who ask tough questions don't get asked backed. Though I don't see anything innately wrong with asking to be able to finish your answers when asked a question. It's not all about 20 s stump speeches, sometimes information takes a bit more time to transmit.
 
Seriously SW, who said anything like that in here? Liar yes. That is my opinion. But I never brought up anything like what you just went off on. And to turn around and in the next paragraph call those who don't agree with you "idiots" is beyond insulting, and inflammatory. You should check yourself.

j-mac


People think that about Obama, and I didn't directly call anybody ignorant. I just said thinking that stuff about Obama is ignorant. That's just like thinking 9/11 was an inside job... it's just stupid IMO
 
If any of you want to see an interviewee REALLY go off, just watch President Clinton's interview with Chris Wallace on youtube.

Sorry SB, but I have to disagree with your assessment of the Wallace/Clinton interview. Clinton was a hostile, arrogant prick with Wallace from the get-go, and Wallace is one of the most professional, fair interviewers in the business. This wasn't a case of an unprofessional or rude interviewer with a political agenda crossing any lines, this was a case of Clinton not liking the question he was asked, not because it was out of bounds, but because it was asked by someone on Fox News... The enemy.
 
Sorry SB, but I have to disagree with your assessment of the Wallace/Clinton interview. Clinton was a hostile, arrogant prick with Wallace from the get-go, and Wallace is one of the most professional, fair interviewers in the business. This wasn't a case of an unprofessional or rude interviewer with a political agenda crossing any lines, this was a case of Clinton not liking the question he was asked, not because it was out of bounds, but because it was asked by someone on Fox News... The enemy.

I agree somewhat. I don't think Wallace was being a prick, or being unprofessional, or anything like that. I think Clinton just went off because he was sick and tired of the whole "Clinton never did anything (or didn't do enough) to try and catch Osama bin Laden" narrative which Wallace was repeating.

Those videos were more for comic relief and comparison than anything else. What Obama said to that reporter pales in comparison to these guys' reactions, that's why I put em there.
 
Last edited:
People think that about Obama, and I didn't directly call anybody ignorant. I just said thinking that stuff about Obama is ignorant. That's just like thinking 9/11 was an inside job... it's just stupid IMO

People? What people? In here? Show me where in here, in this thread, anyone, ANYONE said anything about Obama being a kenyan? Or a Secret Muslim? Other than you trying to smear those of us who don't fall on the ground in orgasmic pleasure at the mere utterance of this liar's name.

And No, you didn't just point out the ignorance of statements like that, after you tried to associate every conservative with these statements, that weren't said in this thread, you then proceeded to call us idiots!

Your tactic in that portion is banal, transparent, and juvenile, and instead of trying to now spin and dismiss what you did, you'd serve us better by just apologizing, acknowledging, and moving on. But I doubt that someone that really holds that kind of petulant view of those that disagree with her own views would have the integrity to do such.

j-mac
 
Feel better now?

I hope so, since launching a gratuitous attack on George Bush is the only purpose I can see for posting that video, because it certainly had nothing to do with the topic or anything I said.
[emphasis added by bubba]

thank you for another opportunity to force you to eat your own words:
Believe me, I know exactly what you're saying and agree with you... Why do you think I said Obama should have taken a page from George Bush's book on how to deal with hostile members of the media?
[emphasis again added by bubba]


and thanks for the opportunity to present just how effective the shrub was with reporters
 
[emphasis added by bubba]

thank you for another opportunity to force you to eat your own words: [emphasis again added by bubba]


and thanks for the opportunity to present just how effective the shrub was with reporters


Justabubba, c'mon man, that was like one of the few things I LIKED about Bush. That was an awesome duck! Dude has great reflexes.
 
Last edited:
People? What people? In here? Show me where in here, in this thread, anyone, ANYONE said anything about Obama being a kenyan? Or a Secret Muslim? Other than you trying to smear those of us who don't fall on the ground in orgasmic pleasure at the mere utterance of this liar's name.

And No, you didn't just point out the ignorance of statements like that, after you tried to associate every conservative with these statements, that weren't said in this thread, you then proceeded to call us idiots!

Your tactic in that portion is banal, transparent, and juvenile, and instead of trying to now spin and dismiss what you did, you'd serve us better by just apologizing, acknowledging, and moving on. But I doubt that someone that really holds that kind of petulant view of those that disagree with her own views would have the integrity to do such.

j-mac

So I am not allowed to bring up birtherism in a thread, unless a Conservative brings up first and expresses birtherism ideas... I have never heard of this rule before, and it's a BS rule as far as I am concerned. This thread wasn't about Bush, but somebody brought Bus into it... and I am pretty damn sure it was a conservative who brought Bush into this.

I didn't make my statement personal, nor was it directed at anybody. I explained myself in that statement.

I assume the journalist is biased, and that the journalist thinks Obama is all bad. I personally don't think there is any reason to be afraid of the president or think he is evil. If you can't handle listening to the president explain his decisions and why he made them, in his own words, they you really don't know who he is. Part of interviewing the president, is learning who he really is and what drives him.

The president isn't crazy or hateful. He doesn't sound insane like Ahmadinejad when he talks.


I can only assume you're a birther, otherwise, you wouldn't have taken so much offense to my statement..
 
mommy... mommy... the big bad reporter is being mean to me...
Obama-crying-.jpg
 
I don't think saying "Let me finish my answer" is an extreme thing to say. Seems reasonable to me.
 
I don't think saying "Let me finish my answer" is an extreme thing to say. Seems reasonable to me.

Obama should have bowed down and kissed the man's feet before he asked for permission...
 
I don't think saying "Let me finish my answer" is an extreme thing to say. Seems reasonable to me.

if he didn't admonish the interviewer, they would point to the interview and insist Obama was showing weakness by allowing himself to be so disrespected
 
I agree somewhat. I don't think Wallace was being a prick, or being unprofessional, or anything like that. I think Clinton just went off because he was sick and tired of the whole "Clinton never did anything (or didn't do enough) to try and catch Osama bin Laden" narrative which Wallace was repeating.

Wallace wasn't repeating the narrative, he was asking him a question about it, giving Clinton the opportunity to address his critics and set the record straight in front of the very audience that most needed to hear it... The mostly conservative based viewers of Fox News.

Those videos were more for comic relief and comparison than anything else. What Obama said to that reporter pales in comparison to these guys' reactions, that's why I put em there.

I understand, np here... and btw, I didn't like the way Clark was interviewed, nor did I like the interview Clark gave.
 
[emphasis added by bubba]

thank you for another opportunity to force you to eat your own words: [emphasis again added by bubba]

And thank you for responding exactly as I expected you to, and giving me the opportunity to show your dishonesty.

I commented on how Bush dealt with reporters who gave rude, partisan or unfair interviews, and you posted a video of an Iraqi reporter throwing a shoe at him, along with a picture that depicts people honoring that event.

So, have you relieved all that pent up political anger of yours and gotten the Bush Bashing out of the way for today, or should we expect to see a few more partisan, off topic attacks on GW??
 
Wanting to be able to finish one's thoughts and sentences warrants a comparison to Al Capone? Are you kidding me? Turn off the ****ing Limbaugh and Beck... unreal. It's like a pack of piranhas that will feast on anything regardless of how much of it is just trash.
 
And thank you for responding exactly as I expected you to, and giving me the opportunity to show your dishonesty.

I commented on how Bush dealt with reporters who gave rude, partisan or unfair interviews, and you posted a video of an Iraqi reporter throwing a shoe at him, along with a picture that depicts people honoring that event.

So, have you relieved all that pent up political anger of yours and gotten the Bush Bashing out of the way for today, or should we expect to see a few more partisan, off topic attacks on GW??
[emphasis added by bubba]
again, you misrepresent what you actually said. so, (once again) let's do see what you actually posted:
Believe me, I know exactly what you're saying and agree with you... Why do you think I said Obama should have taken a page from George Bush's book on how to deal with hostile members of the media?
[emphasis added by bubba]

if you will look at it again (the video has been provided twice already) you will see how bush
deal[t] with hostile members of the media


just as you presented
 
well you can't really blame someone for getting upset with being cut off mid sentance. he is the President afterall.

Doesn't matter who the man is. It's never okay to be rude to someone and cut them off mid-sentence. For example, the interview the President did w/Bill O'Rielly on Super Bowl Sunday. I kept hoping the President would tell O'Rielly, "I'd appreciate it if you'd let me finish my statement before going on to the next question." I see nothing wrong with that, and while I did think O'Rielly did a decent interview, I was rather annoyed at him for constantly interrupting or injecting his smart-allic quips at the end of each answer the President provided. That was very rude and disrespectful.
 
So I am not allowed to bring up birtherism in a thread, unless a Conservative brings up first and expresses birtherism ideas...

No, that isn't what I said. You know that too. You can bring up what ever you wish, no matter how small and petty it makes you appear. But when you post something making it appear as though someone else is saying these things, it is not only dishonest, but should not be tolerated.

I have never heard of this rule before, and it's a BS rule as far as I am concerned.

So you think you should be able to just post anything and attribute it to your opposition whether true or not, as long as it scathingly mocks, and ridicules your opponent....? And you think that is an honorable way to debate?

I didn't make my statement personal, nor was it directed at anybody. I explained myself in that statement.

Sure you did, and although you didn't direct it at a person, you generalized which is worse.

I assume the journalist is biased, and that the journalist thinks Obama is all bad.

See, that is your problem. You think because the reporter didn't ask softball questions of your hero Obama, that he is biased. Yet, if the roles are reversed, would I be correct in assuming that a liberal media person asking questions of a conservative, and not allowing that conservative to get away with skewing the facts is a biased PoS and out to get him as well?

I personally don't think there is any reason to be afraid of the president or think he is evil.

No, I don't think he is evil either, I disagree with how he fundamentally sees this country, and her place in the world, and I think that his policies are ruiness for this country, and I also think that he outright lies to avoid the tough stances, and decisions he has made.

If you can't handle listening to the president explain his decisions and why he made them, in his own words, they you really don't know who he is. Part of interviewing the president, is learning who he really is and what drives him.

No, I can't stand listening to him because he is a liar. And I don't need some 20 minute lecture to answer a 30 second question. As for knowing who he is, the time for that was in 2007, but you libs did your best to help him hide that didn't you?

The president isn't crazy or hateful. He doesn't sound insane like Ahmadinejad when he talks.

Crazy? no. Hateful, absolutely! He is very transparent in holding grudges. As for sounding insane? I guess that is a matter of what you think of his policies isn't it?

I can only assume you're a birther, otherwise, you wouldn't have taken so much offense to my statement..

Well, you'd be dead wrong. See, that is the problem with you assuming anything. Although I think that Obama is purposely withholding his long form BC, because it is a distraction, and a way to paint with a broad brush his opposition, just like you attempted here, but I called you on, I am more so interested in his upbringing, whom influenced him at a young age, his schooling, and his grades and papers, what he thought, who he really is.

But you go ahead and cling to bomb throwing of sorts like you tried here, and I am sure that more accolades like the one from Bubba will emerge, and your position on the far left will be staked out for you.

j-mac
 
With his comments that were caught "off camera", it wouldn't surprise me that he is complaining a bit much. It's understood that the media will do whatever they can to try to get an answer. If he doesn't like it, then perhaps he shouldn't interview as much. Then again, that could create a different problem all in itself...

I don't think the problem is him giving interviews. I think the issue is that in some cases the interviewee isn't allowing him to fully answer his question before going to the next issue or add his/her own commentary at the tailend of a question he has already answered (ala, O'Rielly) or asks the same question a "different" way after it has been asked and answered already. Such antics and displays of disrespect would get on my nerves as well and I'm a very patient person.
 
I don't think the problem is him giving interviews. I think the issue is that in some cases the interviewee isn't allowing him to fully answer his question before going to the next issue or add his/her own commentary at the tailend of a question he has already answered (ala, O'Rielly) or asks the same question a "different" way after it has been asked and answered already. Such antics and displays of disrespect would get on my nerves as well and I'm a very patient person.

We'll see if you are as annoyed with a republican candidate being questioned by an MSNBC reporter and doing the same when the time comes....I suspect your position may shift a little....heh.

j-mac
 
Good for the President. Conservative reporters consistently try to entertain the M&Ms (misfits, malcontents and miscreants) of the extreme right with rude behavior. I'm glad the President slapped him down.

Care to provide us with a few examples?
 
What a child this man is. Thin skinned, and unwilling to be challenged in his answers to tough questions. In fact anyone remember during the campaign, reporters he didn't like the questions of somehow disappeared from the press pool?

This is a man that likes to 'control' the media and when he can't it rattles him. What a loser he is.

j-mac

Oh brother. Control the media?

You wouldn't know media control if it bit you in the ass first worlder.
 
We'll see if you are as annoyed with a republican candidate being questioned by an MSNBC reporter and doing the same when the time comes....I suspect your position may shift a little....heh.

j-mac

please do point it out when it happens. such rude behavior should be found objectionable to anyone or any party


i do note you used the expression "republican candidate" rather than the direct counterpart, "republican president"; is that an indication you have already written off 2012?
 
Oh brother. Control the media?

You wouldn't know media control if it bit you in the ass first worlder.

Oh boy! name calling....pfft....Anything of substance? Anything? Bueler, Bueler!

j-mac
 
If any of you want to see an interviewee REALLY go off, just watch President Clinton's interview with Chris Wallace on youtube.



Or Wesley Clark going off on David Asman:



I just picked these vids cuz I love when libs have balls (which happens all too rarely). I mean, I dislike Fox news too but I just like to see a good smackdown :)


Wow, Clinton destroyed him. That was amazing.
 
Back
Top Bottom