Friday, January 23, 2009

Obama flashes irritation in press room

video in link

President Obama made a surprise visit to the White House press corps Thursday night, but got agitated when he was faced with a substantive question. Asked how he could reconcile a strict ban on lobbyists in his administration with a Deputy Defense Secretary nominee who lobbied for Raytheon, Obama interrupted with a knowing smile on his face. "Ahh, see," he said, "I came down here to visit. See this is what happens. I can't end up visiting with you guys and shaking hands if I'm going to get grilled every time I come down here." Pressed further by the Politico reporter about his Pentagon nominee, William J. Lynn III, Obama turned more serious, putting his hand on the reporter's shoulder and staring him in the eye. "Alright, come on" he said, with obvious irritation in his voice. "We will be having a press conference at which time you can feel free to [ask] questions. Right now, I just wanted to say hello and introduce myself to you guys - that's all I was trying to do."

Cracking after two days?
Well, he has never had a job that has prepared him for this, so I guess he better get some tough skin fast.


American said...

There was nothing wrong with Politico reporter's question. It's very different from partisan attacks one would see from usual suspects such as Rush or Hannity!

Not sure if Obama was irritated. But, he didn't want to answer the question for sure!!

HumbleHumanity said...

Define partisan attack?
Name one partisan attack from Rush or Hannity?

If Obama wasn't irritated, then what word would you use to describe it? It went beyond not "wanting to answer the question for sure".

American said...

Since you are asking me to "name one partisan attack from Rush or Hannity", I'm convinced that you will never be convinced with my answer!

There is nothing wrong - Both Rush and Hannity have millions of devoted followers who don't see anything partisan about them! :)

Coming to Obama's reaction - As I said, I am not sure. I simply don't know what he was thinking. In any case, I didn't find anything wrong with reporter asking him question. Obama will have to eventully answer the question on his nominees - he can't avoid questions for for ever!!

HumbleHumanity said...

Fine, define partisan?

hashfanatic said...

i posted this on a more centrist blog...too tired to recreate! :)

"i think the way he's trying to "train" the press, is to treat him, as if they were CELEBRITY reporters...

i've noticed he's almost constantly asserting what is called "command presence" in law enforcement, always maintaining total control and dominance....i've noticed he does it with just about everyone.

this is what is good about having the right-wing blogosphere on the case. As much as I disagree with so many of their ideas, there has been a sea change, where the right is (correctly) paranoid about overarching abuses of power, and the left is testing, trying to see just how much authority they can assert, and get away with..."

Marshall Art said...

He has to know what's coming before he fields questions. He looks too stupid speaking extemporaneously. He needs to prep. He doesn't want another Joe the plumber.

Anonymous said...

If BHO looks "too stupid" taking questions, I wonder what your opinion of his predecessor's off-the cuff remarks would be...

HumbleHumanity said...

The predecessor is the predecessor. He is gone, bye. Live in the now. The reality is that BHO does not look "smart" off the cuff. He stammers, stutters, and um, uh, can't find the words.

That is reality, documented reality. So he is either "too stupid", or too smart. If he is not "too stupid", then I hope he will educate us.

American said...

Hey HumbleHumanity,

When you engage in 'paty' based politics, not 'issue' based politics - I call it pertisan behavior.

Let me give you another aproach - When you see a person attacking other side for every little thing while turning a blind eye on his own side and mistakes, it's another indication of 'partisan' behavior.

Again - It's our choice. However, it would be much easier if we acknowledge where we stand.

HumbleHumanity said...

OK, Give an example then of Rush ignoring the conservatives while slamming Obama for the same thing?

I don't think you listen enough. They have both been very critical of Bush when they disagree on an issue. They have also openly criticized McCain and virtually all of the Republican party as it is today.

"little things" (taxes, life, big government) are issues.

hashfanatic said...

"The predecessor is the predecessor. He is gone, bye. Live in the now..."

except, the neocons repeatedly hold clinton, and even long-ago dems as carter, johnson, and even roosevelt, as directly responsible for the problems on bush's watch!

i totally agree that the distortions and scapegoating must stop, i simply lament the fact that the right have not exactly been leaders in this regard