Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Baier-ly substantive health-care interview with President Obama

Twelve minutes into his 19-minute White House interview with President Obama, Fox News anchor Bret Baier finally got around to a question on substance. I understand asking a question or three on process. About "deem and pass," about the alliteratively named deals and about the arm-twisting. Not that that last one should come as a shock. But Baier focused a little too obsessively on the mechanics of passing the legislation. His series of interruptions had an "I'll show him!" feel of playing to his audience, which doesn't exactly like Obama (and we know the Obama administration is not keen on Fox News). Tunku Varadarajan at Daily Beast has a different, more benevolent take.

Watching the entire interview made me miss the late moderator of "Meet The Press," Tim Russert. He would have asked process questions. He would have pushed the president to answer questions he didn't feel were being answered. But he would have done so in a manner that was firm, yet respectful. More importantly, he would have focused intensely on the substance of the health-care legislation to cut through the clutter, rhetoric and political posturing so that viewers at home would have as much information as possible before their representatives voted.

Obama stuck to his game plan as much as possible. Over and over again he came back to his people-first talking points that highlight the immediate benefits people would receive upon passage. In the end, that's what the American people want to know and understand. No one will be talking about the ugly process six months from now if the substance of the bill gives people the health security they desperately need. The sooner the House releases the legislation so we can eyeball it, the better.

By Jonathan Capehart  | March 18, 2010; 8:53 AM ET
Categories:  Capehart  | Tags:  Jonathan Capehart  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama the hyper-partisan?
Next: Obama-Israel negotiating agreement: don't ask, don't tell on settlements

Comments

Jonathan,

People will be talkiing about the process six months from now when they realize how moronic this plan is. They'll also realize that the supposed benefits that sycophants like you trumpet don't mean a whole lot to the vast majority of Americans, except that they'll be getting taxed more, get worse health care, and will be paying for other people's health care.

Posted by: tomski12 | March 18, 2010 9:54 AM | Report abuse

What nonsense. From the very beginning the president avoided answering the questions. The reporter was just doing his job.

Posted by: grike | March 18, 2010 9:57 AM | Report abuse

You didn't even need to have the sound turned on. It was so predictable. The POTUS tries to sell his plan, FOX tries to paint him as a failure and a threat. Nothing new. 18,000 Fox emails say it's baaaad. 40,000 Pres emails say it's needed. Who knows? One fact = 30 million Americans wihout health care, losing health care, can't get health care, denied health care and priced out of health care and it's getting worse.

Posted by: MikeA3 | March 18, 2010 10:10 AM | Report abuse

Regardless of the history between Fox News and the Office of the President, Obama is the US President and should be given the respect enjoyed by all previous Presidents. It seems the intention of Fox News was to insult the Office of the President, the people who elected him, and not provide what viewers would like to see, questions regarding the legislation.
tomski12, who do you think is paying for uncovered care and uninsured now?

Posted by: jedwardbarton | March 18, 2010 10:13 AM | Report abuse

Everyone loves hard questions . . .but, would FOX pester/badger a Republican president? Bush got a get-out-of-jail-free card on his FOX interviews, even though he was responsible for a botched war that killed 1000's, that Medicare bill that was unpaid-for yet for some reason didn't bother all the Conservatives at the time. Of course, Bush didn't usually do interviews, or press conferences with anybody, because he knew the facts were not on his side.

Posted by: zippy501 | March 18, 2010 10:14 AM | Report abuse

tomski reckons "people will be talkiing about the process six months from now". That seems unlikely to me. Either they will be angry about the health law's changes or they will be pleased. I doubt if anyone except a few diehards and sandbaggers will be interested in the "process". Maybe you mean something else with the word. I understand it in terms of the article which means "arm-twisting" and politicking to get a bill passed.

From here it looks like an indictment of the U.S. parlamentary system when a bill can't be passed or shelved after a year of bouncing around in Congress. I haven't much patience with the American system of checks and more checks.

Even worse is the possibility that any law that gets passed will come before the axe-grinding Supreme Court. The legislative standstill that body can cause is clear from their actions over the McCain-Feingold law. How anybody can call himself a judge and misjudge so obviously the difference between a corporation and an individual is beyond belief.

As far as 20th century Fox goes, they are not to be taken seriously.

CB in Hamburg

Posted by: chrisbrown12 | March 18, 2010 10:16 AM | Report abuse

The bottom line; we pay ten times the next most expensive healthcare in the world for the 37th best healthcare in the world(WHO). We are not/will not be competetive with current system and eventually it will bankrupt us. I employ 5 people and pay 32k a year for healthcare. Next step, fire someone, to afford other's ins. All the rightwingers complain but have no answers! This is the first step towards an answer, universla healthcare the last. Teddy Roosevelt called for this in 1912!!!

Posted by: crossroadsnow | March 18, 2010 10:17 AM | Report abuse

Bret Baier did the best he could with President Obama in their St. Patrick's Day exchange. The process for this health care plan will matter to people after the legislation passes. The process matters a great deal as it would remove from it the very people who are supposed to benefit from and pay for this plan that nobody will be allowed to see until it is finished. It seems that no on in government seems to be able to explain anything about the bill. I am concerned a great deal about the process. I wish the president success as he is an historic figure. I am disappointed at the path he has chosen to move this eventual law into place. There will be no dissent.

Posted by: Jude5150 | March 18, 2010 10:28 AM | Report abuse

I disagree that we won't be talking about the process if this doesn't follow a straight vote in the House. If they use a parlimentary procedure as a means to fundamentally change the way of life in the United States, I believe there will be either a tremendous hue and cry to replace this Congress or America will passively pave the way for take over by a socialist mentality.

Posted by: andymelton1 | March 18, 2010 10:32 AM | Report abuse

YOu have to hand it to the President he tolerates these imbeciles at the clusterFOX propaganda machine. Why waste your time on these exploiters of the trailer trash in our nation? Ignoring the ignorant is easier but our President believes he can actually teach the tea bag numbskulls something. FOX is pablum for the sheep puppets controlled by the corporations and rich on the right. OBAMANOS!

Posted by: jbento | March 18, 2010 10:33 AM | Report abuse

If only Fox would actually have had the balls to ask Sarah Palin a tough question during the last campaign instead of being her lap dog/head cheerleader and propaganda arm.

Nope, instead, they hired her to continue to spout her uninformed drivel and talking points and to hide the fact that she doesn't have a 6th grade education.

The Fox Propaganda Network is nothing but the media subsidiary of the RNC. No surprises there.

Posted by: B-rod | March 18, 2010 10:34 AM | Report abuse

With all due respect, isn't Tim Russert the individual who said he felt a tingle up his leg when he heard Obama speak? Not exactly unbiased as an interviewer. I applaud the President for going on Fox News. I applaud even more the other news organizations who told the White House that if they continued to insist on excluding Fox News from access, no other journalists would show up.

Posted by: sam38 | March 18, 2010 10:38 AM | Report abuse

The public will remember this 6 months from now. The route and actions this government has taken recently have set new lows for honesty and integrity.

Respect works both ways... The POTUS dodged and avoided most questions asked of him while interrupting just as much if not more than Baier did.

Most people do not support this bill for many reasons. When is Congress and the President going to realise this?

Posted by: USMarine2 | March 18, 2010 10:39 AM | Report abuse

Capeheart: Your liberal heart is bleeding. Baier did a commendable job on Fox yesterday, holding POTUS'feet to the fire. He revealed that he doesn't even know what exactly will be contained in the bill, and continues on a path started during his campaign: style over substance, as in "sweeping reform befitting a president of his fabulous stature." If you were truly an objective viewer, you would observe that Obama fell a few tiers yesterday and looks like a man obsessed with his legacy and how history will judge more than someone willing to face the hard realities of REALLY fixing health care.

Posted by: Not_an_Obot | March 18, 2010 10:42 AM | Report abuse

@sam38: You are confused. It was not Tim Russert.

Posted by: Israel4 | March 18, 2010 10:54 AM | Report abuse

Please view the entire interview and/or read the transcript.

Mr. President said "I don't spend a lot of time worrying about what the procedural rules are in the House or the Senate." The American people are the essence of the procedure. The Administration is trying to pass this bill without a vote from our representatives. This is unconstitutional, and Mr. President doesn't worry about 'the rules'.

Mr. President also says that "we have a vote on whether or not we're going to maintain the status quo, or whether we're going to reform the system." Very few people want to maintain the status quo, but this type of 'reform' is not the answer and there have been other suggestions for actual reform, such as opening up competition across state lines, passing tort reform to cut legal costs, and many other recommendations.

It is obvious that this 'reform' bill is not bipartison, and therefore, does not represent the wishes of the majority of Americans.

"OBAMA: And, Bret, let me tell you something, the fact of the matter is that for the vast majority of people, their health care is not going to change because right now they're getting a better deal."

"OBAMA: Connecticut — what are you specifically referring to?" Does Mr. President know what is going on?

Bottom line is that reportedly insurance companies are making a small 3-4% profit. So assuming this is true, it is not the insurance companies that are making huge profits. How much more can you cut their profits and still have them be viable companies? Where are the profits really going? Or does great quality healthcare just cost a lot of money?

"BAIER: I apologize for interrupting you so much sir. I was trying to get the most for our buck here."

Posted by: joshmtx | March 18, 2010 10:57 AM | Report abuse

What nonsense. From the very beginning the president avoided answering the questions. The reporter was just doing his job.

Posted by: grike
+++++
I have watched the interview and clips of the interview a few times, now. Bairely was doing his job with a tough interview, but Obama was not avoiding answering the questions, he was being interrupted constantly before he could finish an answer. Fox has an agenda, we all know that, so I don't expect too much "fair and balanced" from them.

Posted by: creatia52 | March 18, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

You guys must be kidding right? FoXnews treated Obama like pampering a baby. Do you remember how tough they were on Bush and Cheney interviews? All the touch questions about war on Iraq and WMD? How were the lucrative contracts in Iraq were awarded? What was the planning process for Iraq invasion?

Posted by: Israel4 | March 18, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

To Sam 38- the commentator you are thinking of is Chris Matthews, not Tim Russert. I find it most appalling that the "process" so criticized was used by Republicans for legislation they wanted and that is now a forgotten issue. Also, the "process fight" continues to ignore the real pain, cost and plight of the uninsured. Are we our brother's keeper or are we as a nation so foolishly selfish that we can ignore the misery of 40 million fellow citizens? I would rather my money be used to help other citizens than pay millions for salaries of health insurance CEOs- the President tries hard to present the obvious, too many closed minded folks can not see the obvious.

Posted by: peacevoice | March 18, 2010 11:04 AM | Report abuse

When health care reform passes, and it will, the President and all in congress who supported will, in fact, be vindicated.

When Democrats and Republican Americans, alike, who have been laid off in the last several years are able to have their benefits restored, as a result of this action, the opposition will be hard pressed to get it repealed along ideological, racist or flat our ignorant grounds.

I've seen my deductible increased 200% in the last year. Something has to give. If it is painful to me, I cannot imagine how it is for those who are uninsured or who have recently lost their jobs.

Health Care Reform is not the subject to kick around like a political football. Real lives are at stake. People are dying without coverage.

The real "death panels" are the predatory rescission committees within health insurance providers.

I support the president on THIS legislation 100% because at the end of the day it one of few bills that will help ordinary Americans in a substantive way.

Posted by: concernedaboutdc | March 18, 2010 11:09 AM | Report abuse

Yes, there was a lack of respect apparent throughout the interview.

The president showed a glaring disrespect not only for his interviewer but also the American people. He chose to be interviewed. It was an attempt to cynically manipulate the debate on the bill - an 11th hour attempt to curry favour and get some of the blue dogs he needs to win.

Yes- that's all it was for Obama. All he did was regurgitate over and over the "fact" (as he sees it) that "his" bill will do this or that. Aside from the obvious, that he did not tell the truth, and did not know what was actually in the bill, and the whole bit about Medicare was mystifying, he just wants to win. He made that clear. And he doesn't care how he does it.

Process matters alot. It's the difference between a democracy and a dictatorship. A former senator and lecturer in constitutional law ought to know this. I suspect he does. He just doesn't care. And he doesn't care that the American people are rightfully up in arms over the bill and the process.

He gave an interview which was the least presidential that I have ever seen. Disrespectful and dodging. Baier had to interrupt him to prevent him from wasting time and not answering the questions. It's a tactic Obama uses over and over and Baier tried not to get caught out. It is a tactic which is beneath the office of the president.

Posted by: hrich | March 18, 2010 11:15 AM | Report abuse

It is all about the process and special deals. When the propaganda tools in the media keep telling themselves that it is not about the deal making, bribes, vote buying and corruption, it is what American is talking about.

How will any democrat in Arizona defend Gator Aid but Medicare Advantage to Arizona seniors being eliminated? How will any democrat in Texas defend a $100 million hospital in Connecticut but nothing for Texas?

Democrats will lose the house and 7-9 senate seats on this process and corruption.

It matters, and stop telling us it doesn't. It took 14 months for a real journalist to hold this president accountable.

Posted by: Cornell1984 | March 18, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse

In response to peacevoice - you say: "I would rather my money be used to help other citizens than pay millions for salaries of health insurance CEOs" Do you personally give your money to help other citizens? I do, aside from taxes, I have a budget for donations. But, I would rather keep my money from the government so that I personally can decide how I want to use it to help others. I assure you, if all of the people who supposedly want to help others actually did help others, this would not be necessary. I believe however that many people just want other people to help other people.

Are most of these health insurance companies not public companies? CEOs make millions because they EARN millions, in every industry.

Lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine.

Posted by: joshmtx | March 18, 2010 11:18 AM | Report abuse

I tried to read some of the Health Care bill.
It is impossible. By some report (which may be an exaggeration) it will take ten years to just write a guide manual.
I live in Massachusetts where we have a State bill mandating health coverage. Since that bill was introduced my health care contributions skyrocketed and coverage drastically reduced due mainly to large increases in co-pays. Will this bill be different or will it accelerate the negative process?

Posted by: tian1 | March 18, 2010 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Obama remained cool and intelligent, as usual, and once again showed why he won the election, and why Health care Reform will pass, and America can get on with some real progress and beyons all the smear campaigns that attempted to derail this essential bill.

Posted by: dylan915 | March 18, 2010 11:25 AM | Report abuse

the author wants to shoot the messenger.the journalist is only doing his job.

Posted by: razor2 | March 18, 2010 11:26 AM | Report abuse

the author wants to shoot the messenger.the journalist is only doing his job.

Posted by: razor2 | March 18, 2010 11:26 AM | Report abuse

How can this be called a good interview when Bret Baier refused to listen to the answers to his questions? He was arrogant and rude and would not have treated any other guest in such a demeening manner.

Posted by: carolo43 | March 18, 2010 11:26 AM | Report abuse

I am wondering if Johnathan Watched the same interview that I did. Maybe Baier interrupted a couple of times, but Obama did as well. Not only did he interrupt but went on and on and rarely answered the question that Baier asked. And once again, Obama insinuated that he is the only person in the room who has any intelligence, i.e. "If you vote yes, your for reform, if you vote no, your against reform. Once again Mr President you have taken a situation, that if we don't agree with you, then something must be wrong us. Talk about dishonest reporting Johnathan.

Posted by: BrendaSueBob | March 18, 2010 11:27 AM | Report abuse

Strangely, I too thought of Tim Russert. He wouldn't have done that even to Dick Cheney. It is rank bad manners, an interviewer interrupting the interviewee no matter who it is. But then, Bret is a Faux News guy. Good manners & Faux News don't go in the same sentence, unless there is a negative connotation.
Even Bill O'Reilly was way better when he interviewed candidate Obama. If I were Pres.Obama, I would have stopped talking at the second interruption, let Bret yap yap & when he is done would ask him "Are you done? Now, don't interrupt me until I am done".

Posted by: sarvenk63 | March 18, 2010 11:29 AM | Report abuse

Mr. Baier is symptomatic of Fox network's fanatical right wing leaning and latent racist attitudes. He would never have been as impolite with a white president. The good news is that no intelligent person can take that network seriously. The bad news is, that there are many people in this country who are not very intelligent. Just for the record, this writer is Caucasian.

Posted by: donlo | March 18, 2010 11:29 AM | Report abuse

The "process" that Bret Baier kept referring to is relevant here. This process has been used in the past by both parties, but never to ram through such an expensive, unpopular bill. This bill does nothing to address some of the real issues in reform. It merely throws money at the problem penalizing all of us in the process. Everyone with have less than adequate healthcare now. Also at risk is our AAA credit rating which will cost us dearly if we lose that. If our elected representatives on BOTH sides would leave special interest out and stop spending on all of these ridiculous pork projects, we might actually have the funds to do it right. Until then, this will never work.

Posted by: cmwyman | March 18, 2010 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Maybe it's just me, but has anyone else noticed that Fox News is slurring the Deem and Pass term to sound more like Demon Pass?

I heard Demon over and over last night. Now, maybe it's just that they're not articulating their words enough, but I wouldn't be surprised if we start seeing protest signs reading, "Don't Demon Pass Socialist Health Care."

Posted by: pathfinder12 | March 18, 2010 11:36 AM | Report abuse

@joshmtx: Excellent point. Most of the insurance companies are public companies. Their wealth is public wealth, people's wealth. When they rip people off, it is like transfer your money from the right pocket to left pocket. When they raise their premium at 2X inflation rate? It is like getting a double raise every year.

I feel so good now.

Posted by: Israel4 | March 18, 2010 11:41 AM | Report abuse

The Opacity of Hope – A Haiku:

http://haikme.wordpress.com/2010/03/18/the-opacity-of-hope/

Posted by: haiku360 | March 18, 2010 11:42 AM | Report abuse

joshmtx,

Just goes to show that you haven't taken the time to read the bill yourself, and just sit there are repeat talking points.

There is a piece that says health care should open up competition, and it will probably lead to shopping across state lines. This has to be done carefully though because there are loopholes in this type of regulation now that the health care industry could use.

And there is tort reform. And they are going to tackle waste and fraud in Medicare and Medicaid.

Educate yourself a bit.

Posted by: pathfinder12 | March 18, 2010 11:46 AM | Report abuse

I agree with JohnA3 "One fact = 30 million Americans wihout health care, losing health care, can't get health care, denied health care and priced out of health care and it's getting worse".

I can't believe that the US the richest country in the world and you talk about christian values to help others and yet you can't bring charity / help to your own brothers and sisters.

Some things in life are worth paying for

Posted by: tahir_maher | March 18, 2010 11:50 AM | Report abuse

hrich,

What we witnessed was an interviewer sticking to talking points and trying to get the president to stick to one line answers on one of the most complicated industries in the world.

Because the President understands much of what he is talking about, he tried to fully explain pieces of the bill and his positions on why they are important. But this gave the interviewer no time for gotcha questions?

The interviewer was mad that he couldn't trick Obama into stupid debate, like process in the legislation, process that's been around for years and used by both parties, and process that Obama has no control over.

Had Obama said, "I want to change the process in Congress," Republicans would have screamed that he's trying to become a dictator.

So makes the point that it doesn't matter what Obama does, Republicans will oppose it. He has finally come to terms with that, and has decided that at this point, he doesn't need them. They are a cancerous problem in a legislature that should be legislating to fix the country that they helped destroy.

Posted by: pathfinder12 | March 18, 2010 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Basically, republican voters and Fox News believers are misinformed, and republican politicians and Fox News are simply bad people.

The sheer disrespect of the office of president by the continual interruption so that the president cannot even answer a single question shows but one thing: that Fox News is not interested in allowing him to answer any questions. How is it possible to have a dialogue when the other side is not only constantly feeding itself with misinformation but has absolutely zero interest in hearing the other point of view? How is it possible to heal or govern this country when the whole point is just simply to make the President look bad by asking a bunch of ridiculous questions that nobody would be asking if Fox News hadn't put those ridiculous questions in their heads in the first place? Every day I wake up, get on news.google.com and I see one headline after another from Fox that comes from an entirely negative point of view, intended to hurt the president.

Years from now, people are going to talk about this parliamentary procedure? Really? That's like how they used the label of "socialism" against FDR's social security. Do people, decades later, say to themselves "how could we have allowed our country to fall to the Socialist evil that is Social Security?" Sure, a handful of ideologically rigid libertarians do, but most republicans and democrats don't.

Basically, the whole idea that they can deny an up or down vote on any bill is ridiculous in the first place.

Posted by: DiSangro | March 18, 2010 11:57 AM | Report abuse

From the beginning of the Obama Presidency I have listened to Fox five News, right winged republician views that had sickened and disturbed me. They let me know just how much we can hate ourselves bad enough not to help ourselves. I guess that's what they mean when they say it's in our nature to destroy ourselves.

Posted by: Rayden1234 | March 18, 2010 12:02 PM | Report abuse

I think everyone understands that this bill has nothing to do with healthcare and everything to do with attempting to create another group of voters who the Dems can frighten every two years in to voting for them.

Posted by: zoomie95 | March 18, 2010 12:04 PM | Report abuse

No Sam38, that was, supposedly, Chris Matthews. Tim Russert was dead before Obama was elected.
Typical Fox watcher, Sam38; know nothing, run mouth anyway.

Posted by: cjbass55 | March 18, 2010 12:04 PM | Report abuse

All Fox channels are blocked in my house. We have no time for their vitriol or bad manners. So I didn't get to see this interview, but from the clips I did see the interviewer was really rude and uncouth. Not surprisng ... one of the reasons they are blocked is because they tend to focus on "gottcha" and not on the real issues. We have to pass health reform. 9/11 killed 3,000 people. Lack of helath insurance kills approximately 40,000 people a year. Where is the outrage over that???

Posted by: PamelaN | March 18, 2010 12:11 PM | Report abuse

Jonathan,

Bret Baier owned Obama during that interview. Bret did what the rest of today's so-called "journalists" refuse to do - challenge government officials with hard-hitting questions. Instead of blaming Bret and Fox News, how about answering this: Why are you and so many other "mainstream media" reporters and columnists in Obama's (and the Dem's) corner all the frack'n time?! You in the media are supposed to be hyper-critical regardless of who is in power. Instead, you're a pit bull if the elected official has an (R) after his name, and a lap dog if they have a (D). No wonder that Fox News is eating everyone else's lunch these days!

Posted by: coffeetime | March 18, 2010 12:12 PM | Report abuse

"With all due respect, isn't Tim Russert the individual who said he felt a tingle up his leg when he heard Obama speak? Not exactly unbiased as an interviewer. I applaud the President for going on Fox News. I applaud even more the other news organizations who told the White House that if they continued to insist on excluding Fox News from access, no other journalists would show up"

No...That was Chris Matthews.

Posted by: jjj141 | March 18, 2010 12:16 PM | Report abuse

Fox interview is not about news....it was meant as a show of the true color of the fix-news.
One must give this president lots of credit for being patient with this ideologue so called news man.
Baier, the boring, reminds me of a little kid who could not his selfish-childish desires from interrupting an adult.

Posted by: wrock76taolcom | March 18, 2010 12:19 PM | Report abuse

"Bret Baier owned Obama during that interview. Bret did what the rest of today's so-called "journalists" refuse to do - challenge government officials with hard-hitting questions. Instead of blaming Bret and Fox News, how about answering this: Why are you and so many other "mainstream media" reporters and columnists in Obama's (and the Dem's) corner all the frack'n time?! You in the media are supposed to be hyper-critical regardless of who is in power. Instead, you're a pit bull if the elected official has an (R) after his name, and a lap dog if they have a (D). No wonder that Fox News is eating everyone else's lunch these days!"

There is a difference between hard hitting and being rude and not respecting the office of the president. Baier, who was reciting the Fox News talking points, interupted the president 15 times during the first 20 minutes, when the President was answering his questions.

Funny how Fox News seems to have very civil interviews with Bush & Cheney, and very non-civil interviews with Obama and Clinton.

Posted by: jjj141 | March 18, 2010 12:21 PM | Report abuse

It was the first interview Obama has given without (1) a rehearsed script, and (2) one of the gushing "network news" anchors who see their first responsibility to be to protect Obama’s image and their second to push his agenda. As to your mention of getting to “the substance of the health-care legislation”, of cutting through “the clutter, rhetoric and political posturing", that is exactly what Baier was trying to do. In this bill, many of us believe Obama and the Democratic Congress have given us a pile of “clutter” and corruption. Many, if not most Americans believe that the bill will do the opposite of its intent, will irreparable harm the very people it is intended to help. As such, we’ve instructed our representatives to vote against it. When Pelosi talks about passing this bill without a house vote and the President says that’s OK, they are telling millions of us that we’re irrelevant, that we no longer have the most basic of our constitutional rights, the right we’ve had for over 200 years to influence legislation that substantially impacts our lives. No, Baier asked exactly the right lead question. He was forced to interrupt because Obama didn’t answer, couldn’t answer because he knows the process is dirty and that his party is dishing the dirt. From there on Obama responses got more evasive, lacking in relevance or substance. Without his scripted, rehearsed interviews and his image bodyguards, Obama showed he’s not the messiah but just another disingenuous, corrupt politician and, one that’s not particularly bright. He showed that your emperor has no cloths.

Posted by: davidshea | March 18, 2010 12:21 PM | Report abuse

Capeheart,
Why do you insist on always making racist and hateful comments about white americans? Stop black racism and black hate now!

Posted by: sdw2is | March 18, 2010 12:24 PM | Report abuse

If BO just wanted to give his talking points he should of just had a news conference but he went on an interview with FOX. An interview means questions for him to answer which he didn't answer any of. If Brett just let him set there a spout lies then it's not an interview and should not of gone on with FOX. He's just a President, not God, so don't give me this "He was Rude to Him" or "Disrespected Him". I for one thought the President was the one who was rude by need answering the peoples questions. But that means you would havee to know something if you answer them. It sounded like he doesn’t even know what’s in the Bill and that is disturbing to me.
Where was all this talk when every other news firm bashed Bush. He was President but no one complained about it then. It's a two way street and if you can cross without getting hit, don't cross it

Posted by: edwardmartin | March 18, 2010 12:25 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: PamelaN

All Fox channels are blocked in my house. We have no time for their vitriol or bad manners. So I didn't get to see this interview, but from the clips I did see the interviewer was really rude and uncouth. Not surprisng ... one of the reasons they are blocked is because they tend to focus on "gottcha" and not on the real issues. We have to pass health reform. 9/11 killed 3,000 people. Lack of helath insurance kills approximately 40,000 people a year. Where is the outrage over that???
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If you block Fox channels and you didn't see the WHOLE interview why are you posting on this thread? Your jerk of a leader gave more thought to Union Employees (who don't pay the cadillac plan taxes till 2018) and less to those who are in desperate need now (the plan doesn't even kick in until 2014) not to mention the other pork in the healthcare reform pie.
If you want to stick your head in the sand then do so but don't insult those who have gotten the whole story by listening to all sides.

Posted by: tjmlrc | March 18, 2010 12:26 PM | Report abuse

I'd truly like to see the debate over the fact that we spend *twice* as much per person on health care than any other country, only visit our doctor *once* a year (on average) yet still only live as long as a swede, brit or aussie.

it's not an insurance issue - it's a public health issue...

Posted by: HankC_57 | March 18, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

It was not Tim Russert who made the "tingle up my leg comment." That was Chris Matthews.

Even a 5 year old knows that it is rude to interrupt ANYONE. A good reporter can ask tough questions and prevent politicians from weasling without being rude.

And for those who think we don't currently pay for the uninsured -- you could not be more wrong. The uninsured person's unpaid bill is merely shifted to the insured person's cost, thus increasing costs for YOU, tomski12.

Posted by: truly1 | March 18, 2010 12:45 PM | Report abuse

Quoting the article:
"Obama stuck to his game plan as much as possible. Over and over again he came back to his people-first talking points that highlight the immediate benefits people would receive upon passage. In the end, that's what the American people want to know and understand. No one will be talking about the ugly process six months from now if the substance of the bill gives people the health security they desperately need. The sooner the House releases the legislation so we can eyeball it, the better."

What are the IMMEDIATE benefits that "some" people will see? Higher taxes, employer sponsored health benefits slashed? This bill doesn't take effect until 2014 or later. We start paying for it now, and then we may get some benefits in 4 years.

Why don't you go down to your local car dealership (if its still open) and start paying for your new car that you plan to purchase in 4 years. Isn't it the same idea? By the way, somebody else will decide which car you get to purchase and the price. But, start paying for it now.

Posted by: blasher | March 18, 2010 12:49 PM | Report abuse

Brett was trying too hard to have a "gotcha" moment. When you ask a question you give the person a chance to answer and if they don't answer the question you ask it again. Interrupting before the answer is complete looks and is foolish since you don't know that they're not going to answer the question.

Posted by: rlj1 | March 18, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

The guy in the White House was only interested in hitting key notes for his selling freedom reform under the guise of health care. Not only couldn't he answer the questions; he didn't. I am absolutely sick of this guy's lies.

Posted by: nosam32 | March 18, 2010 12:59 PM | Report abuse

i saw a report today on the internet about the ten dumbest states in the union (based on things like literacy, education, culture, you know, the kind of things the tea baggers hate). guess what. eight of the ten are solid red ones, places where palin and limbaugh are highly thought of. if the relative popularity of fox news had been factored in, i daresay the entire list would have been red.

Posted by: jimfilyaw | March 18, 2010 1:00 PM | Report abuse

I saw large parts of the interview and couldn't get over the hypocrisy of FOX (and the FOX interviewer). They never questioned Bush or Cheney with anything but sycophantic adoration. (I'm a news junkie; I actually watch these things.) They even treated Sarah Palin as if she were some sort of china figurine, so delicate were they.

It's all one-sided at FOX. Their viewers have been whipped into a frenzy of fear by these anchors and "news people". They stoke their narrative; they do not engage in objective, respectful journalism.

Posted by: cturtle1 | March 18, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

Wow where was Bret when Bush and Cheney all lying about the WMD and the Iraq WAR ?
What question they asked ? and now, they are just worry about Legislative process ! give me a break.
Journalism is dead. that what you get from the conservatives Media

Posted by: tqmek1 | March 18, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

Why oh why he keep going to FOX, all of us know he is not going to change the mind of their viewers, that prove that His Advisers are GOP operatives setting him up for traps from day one.

Posted by: tqmek1 | March 18, 2010 1:10 PM | Report abuse

It was Historic and Unprecedented that a member of the press finally asked Obama tough questions and pointed out Obama's lies to the public.

Obama was so rattled he was imagining earthquakes in Hawaii.

Posted by: robtr | March 18, 2010 1:11 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Capehart, I realize that we have not been seeing very much recently that resembles what Bret Baier did in his interview with the president. Bret caught Obama off guard and unprepared for tough, pointed questioning. Long ago this is the way journalistic interviews were conducted. You feel it was disrespectful because Obama came off looking uninformed and argumentative. You my not like Obama's performance but you must admit that as POTUS he is required to answer the tough questions on occasion.

Posted by: Charley_XF | March 18, 2010 1:17 PM | Report abuse

To use the metaphor of "Goldilocks" and The Three "Bears" to describe the interview, I think Bret "Baier" handed "Scoldilocks" his lunch. And the lunch consisted of hot porridge which the President simply could not swallow.

The President's performance and demeanor were atrocious, and I doubt he'll be returning to Fox for another interview anytime soon. He simply cannot handle tough questions from real journalists, and that's too bad because I'd love to see him debate Bill O'Reilly now that O'Reilly has had 14 months to observe the President's performance (or lack thereof).

Posted by: VirginianforFreedom | March 18, 2010 1:21 PM | Report abuse

>>i saw a report today on the internet about the ten dumbest states in the union ...<<

Ooo, somebody said it on the internet -- the gold standard of credibility!

Posted by: wumhenry | March 18, 2010 1:24 PM | Report abuse

I think that one of the key things here, with the whole healthcare issue, is that the left thinks that government should be able to take money from people that have it and give it to people who don't. The government has no right to do this. We should not reward people for failure and enslave them to poverty and dependency on the government.

People of America: You will suffer hardship, plan for it.

The idea of insurance companies covering pre-existing conditions still seems absolutely rediculous to me. It no longer is insurance. You can't do that with car insurance. Lesson 1, if you don't have insurance, get it before you get sick. Low cost policies do exist. Many people who say that they can't afford it, surprisingly actually can, they just choose otherwise. And guess what, if you can't afford it, then you need to work more, harder and smarter. Excepting a few, it is not anyone else's responsibility to pay for you.

In most cases either you can afford it or there are programs that exist to assist you. No one has to lose their home due to medical bills. If you choose to take the risk of going without insurance, then you should have to pay the price of that risk. The problem is that so often we accept the cost of other's risk.

Posted by: joshmtx | March 18, 2010 1:25 PM | Report abuse

I, too miss Tim Russert. He was the best and can never be replaced. He had class, very knowledgeable of the issues to be discussed with his guest and very respectable. Fox News on the other hand--!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: phyllisr5 | March 18, 2010 1:37 PM | Report abuse

If all the President wanted to do was deliver talking points, he didn't need an interview. And I'll admit, Fox might not 'badger' President Bush in an interview, but that's why there are other news outlets, to cover what other outlets' biases leave out.

Posted by: msully25 | March 18, 2010 1:39 PM | Report abuse

@pathfinder12 I didn't realize that you had a copy of the final bill available. Do you care to share that with the rest of the world? Since you have supposedly read the bill, can you please explain it to the rest of us and point out exactly where it says those things? 'should' and 'probably' are nice words, they just don't mean anything firm.

How about a bill to 'to tackle waste and fraud in Medicare and Medicaid' TODAY! Let's pass the things that we all agree on, and start fixing the problems now.

And would someone please explain to me how we are going to save 150 billion dollars while spending almost 1 trillion. If we can save 1.1 trillion, then let's please do that NOW!

Posted by: joshmtx | March 18, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Dear Lefty pundit. The "interview" proved that the President can't handle responding to substantive questions with meaningfull follow-up and depth. The clear fact that the administration and the Dems are ignoring the constitution to rush this through in order to avoid the stain of voting for this during the November elections should embarrass the President and his sheeple.

Doesn't anyone get it that he can't convince the Dems to get on board with huge majorities in both houses and himself with a ready pen? If he could corral his own sheep he would not need even one Republican vote. He is a political neophyte struggeling mightily to pass his centerpiece legislation. And, he is still in campaign mode. Anyone who dares question our narcissistic leader is painted as not from a credible real news organization.

I suggest the President go on MSMBC and we can all smile and sing a happy tune while we watch Matthews and Olby hump his leg! Hey wait a minute! That's a very bad idea! No one watches MSNBC!

Posted by: rogerherd | March 18, 2010 2:08 PM | Report abuse

Bret did as good a job as anyone could given obama's strategy of continuosly spewing his talking points as if he thought he was talking to his usual hand-picked,not-too-smart, welfare groups.
Obama seemed not to have any understanding of the backroom deals!!
He seemed not to understand pelosi's strategy is unconstitutional!
He seemed not to understand the People don't want this POS!

Posted by: thornegp2626 | March 18, 2010 2:18 PM | Report abuse

The point is this: There used to be a genuine consevative movement in this country that was populated by honest and capable men (yes men it was that long ago). Right now we have an uniformed hysterical mob as the opposition party and this just can't be a good thing for our country.

Posted by: bob29 | March 18, 2010 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Obama ducked and weaved every question, like a good politician. Both parties are very good at side stepping the issues. You'll never pin the good? ones down. It's the nature of the beast. As far as respect is concerned, it's hard to imagine respecting any major politician.

Posted by: richard36 | March 18, 2010 2:22 PM | Report abuse

The Constitution of the United States IS the Process inwhich we run our Country.
For the President to dismiss the process is to directly dismiss the Constitution of the Country. No matter who is the President, Democrat, Republican or other, they have to uphold the Constitution not wave it off and call it a "ugly process".
That is treasonous, plain and simple.

As far as Mr Baier interrupting the President or "not showing respect" to him, I say "To bad Mr. President". If you are willing to disrespect the very document that makes this Country great and the same document that is used as the example for other nations to follow as their countries Constitution (ie. Russia, post USSR, then you do not deserve any respect by any citizen of this Country.

We heard all the Presidents talking points of well over a year now, he need not bore US again. And if Fox is the only new outlet in the entire country that is not walking in lock-step with the President, Good for them. Why do Democrats get so personally insulted when not everyone agrees with them?

And lastly, the President called for the interview. He said in the past that he dislikes the Fox network. And he was trying to go to their house to "put them in their place" but instead he was not allowed to be the bully he went there to be. Congratualtions Mr. Baier.

Posted by: Kenvilkid | March 18, 2010 2:23 PM | Report abuse

It's about time a reporter held this idiot's feet to the fire. One network against all the rest. How sad.

Posted by: BadNews | March 18, 2010 2:27 PM | Report abuse


Considering the back-room deals and bribery, *any* question to Obama is appropriate. He got of way too easy.
.

Posted by: Billw3 | March 18, 2010 2:30 PM | Report abuse

whatever happened to "speak truth to power? I would hope an interview with the PResident over govt intervention into 1/6 of our economy would be "combative." What a shame the President didn't see fit to actually answer any questions, but instead just spouted talking points.

Posted by: silencedogoodreturns | March 18, 2010 2:31 PM | Report abuse

@tomski12 wrote:
"They'll also realize that the supposed benefits that sycophants like you trumpet don't mean a whole lot to the vast majority of Americans, except that they'll be getting taxed more, get worse health care, and will be paying for other people's health care."
.
Earth to tomski12: You already are getting worse health care and paying for other people's health care. As for higher taxes, Health Care costs now account for 15-20% of the economy. 20 years ago it was 10% of the economy. So you're going to pay for it either way. At least with this bill you can't be cut off or denied coverage.

Posted by: rpixley220 | March 18, 2010 2:33 PM | Report abuse

Did Capehart watch the same interview that I watched?

Fox's Bret Baier took a cue from the champion blowhards of constant and persistent interruption, Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly.

When was the last time any "guest" on their programs were able to speak a completed thought on that network without their massive ego's constantly interrupting every five seconds.

Personally, If I were the President, I would have stopped talking until the bag of wind too a breather, and asked if he was actually looking for an answer, or simply demonstrating his mastery of the English language?

When will the President understand that the Republicans aren't looking for answers, they're more interested in hearing themselves talk. And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And talk! And...

Posted by: helloisanyoneoutthere | March 18, 2010 2:38 PM | Report abuse

Talk about change. I've lived to see 11 US Presidents and none have been treated with such disrespect as President Obama. Even President Nixon who had to resign was shown repect by the reporters. Now if any reporters had done what Fox News reporter Bret Baier to Obama when George W. Bush was President that reporter would be in Gitmo now. This is what the young people see from the news reporters, Law Makers and Teabaggers and they will follow. Fox News isn't alone on it's attacks but few realize it's not only about Obama it's about America. The KKK worked hard to get Obama in office for what we see happening. As Rush Limbaugh said the plan is to destroy Obama and the USA. Racism/Hate is fueled to divid this country as the South hopes to rise again and replace our flag with the Confederate Flag. Yes a modern form of slavery and the push is on. Even national TV station Host have joined in as they accepted the bribes.

Posted by: qqbDEyZW | March 18, 2010 2:39 PM | Report abuse


rlj1 - There's a difference in interrupting an evasive speel vs interrupting the answer to a question. Obama can't defend bribery and back-room deals, so he evades such questions. He's a man of low moral fiber.
.

Posted by: Billw3 | March 18, 2010 2:40 PM | Report abuse


"I've lived to see 11 US Presidents and none have been treated with such disrespect as President Obama."

Respect is earned, and Obama's lies, abiding bribery, and back-room deals don't cut it.
.

Posted by: Billw3 | March 18, 2010 2:43 PM | Report abuse

Billw3, do you even have a clue as to how Washington has been working for the past 100 years?

Or when you make deals in your line of work, is it just to make the other guy feel good?

Or maybe making the other guy feel good IS your line of work!

Posted by: helloisanyoneoutthere | March 18, 2010 2:48 PM | Report abuse

I'm not a Fox admirer, but I have to say that at least this reporter tried to ask relevant questions. It was unseemly the way that OB tried to duck legitimate questions. Every reporter from the Post and the Government News Channel, otherwise known as MSNBC throw softballs and are apparently afraid of asking hard questions which, as reporters, they are responsible to do.

Posted by: emyers12345 | March 18, 2010 2:48 PM | Report abuse

Stupid liberals: So we don't care about "process" huh? Why didn't bret Baier ask about "substance"? I'M PLENTY INTERESTED IN "PROCESS" WITH WHOLESALE GRAFT, CORRUPTION, BRIBERY AND FRAUD ARE INVOLVED, AND THE PRESIDENT IS LEADING THE WAY IN OUTRIGHT LIES.

THE "SUBSTANCE" OF THE BILL WILL BANKRUPT THE COUNTRY... WHAT MORE DO YOU NEED TO KNOW

STUPID F K N G LIBERALS

Posted by: TonyV1 | March 18, 2010 2:58 PM | Report abuse

Jonathan,

Your comment "Baier focused a little too obsessively on the mechanics of passing the legislation" implies the end justifies the means. It does not. The "process" as you like to refer to it is the due process afforded the citizens of the United States via our representatives. To push process aside for the sake of political agenda and expediency (sorry, when the bill is overwhelmingly unpopular with Americans, I don't buy Americans just want a vote) circumvents OUR rights to that process. It is unconstitutional as already elborated by even the most liberal Constitutional experts. Is speed more important than right? Doing it wrong will only open it up to legal challenge and waste even more our our money the President seems so eager to throw away.

Posted by: navy_wings | March 18, 2010 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Obama does not care about the Constitution and suck ups like Capehart want him to succeed in destroying everything thathas made this country great . Process does not matter ?

Posted by: borntoraisehogs | March 18, 2010 3:07 PM | Report abuse


helloisanyoneoutthere said:
"Billw3, do you even have a clue as to how Washington has been working for the past 100 years? Or when you make deals in your line of work, is it just to make the other guy feel good? Or maybe making the other guy feel good IS your line of work!"

Some have integrity, some don't. No problem in telling which by your post, it shows you lacking.
.

Posted by: Billw3 | March 18, 2010 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Baier had no choice but to handle the interview as he did. He had limited time, and the president was determined to get in his talking points while avoiding tough questions. Baier had a lot of ground to cover, as the rest of the media has refused to grill Obama about his health-care plans, and instead has simply acted as his media mouthpiece. (Here's looking at you, Jonathan).

Posted by: dakotadoug83 | March 18, 2010 3:23 PM | Report abuse

Brett Baier is a priviledged, drunken frat boy. He comes across as anxious because he has serious issues over his lack of penis size.

Posted by: danw1 | March 18, 2010 3:24 PM | Report abuse

What nonsense. From the very beginning the president avoided answering the questions. The reporter was just doing his job.

Posted by: grike | March 18, 2010 9:57 AM | Report abuse

#########################################

No, the real nonsense is calling these clowns on Fox reporters. Their job is to act tough with Obama to please the wingnut audience.

Posted by: maggots | March 18, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Obama does not care about the Constitution and suck ups like Capehart want him to succeed in destroying everything thathas made this country great . Process does not matter ?

Posted by: borntoraisehogs | March 18, 2010 3:07 PM | Report abuse

#########################################

Process and the constitution only matter to you guys when you can score political points off of them.

Posted by: maggots | March 18, 2010 3:27 PM | Report abuse

grite wrote: "What nonsense. From the very beginning the president avoided answering the questions. The reporter was just doing his job."

Fox' partisanship is obvious as they NEVER pushed the Bush Administration on Iraqi WMD, mushroom clouds and other such lies. They only just "do their job" when it suits them.

Posted by: HillRat | March 18, 2010 3:28 PM | Report abuse

Obama convinced the Fox audience of viewers, vast majority of Americans that Obama’s due or die pass the bill will cost Americas $940 billion added to national deficit. Faulty assumptions by Obama will not result in deficit reduction. Get serious and monitory federal spending bills compared to revenues and see unmanageable deficit. Track deficit year 1 and year 2 until the end of the Obama administration. Read Obama’s lips, he does not care.

Liberals who embrace health bill have been convinced by Obama that it is in their best political interest to cast their vote his way to pass the bill. Do not be deceived by Obama. The American voter will remember and the disaster inflected by federal law will be experienced and the reaction will be massive to end Obama’s political career.

The political tactics of Obama and liberals are in violation of the majority will of the people and against the U.S. Constitution protecting the rights of the American people. Obama and those responsible for pushing the Obama health care into law will be held accountable.

Obama and liberal Democrats have slapped the American people in the face. They will abuse the power of pubic office to twist arms, make deals and do what ever it takes to pass their bill and impose a government structure of health care on the people.

Obama and liberals have stooped to the level of trying to convince Catholic nuns that abortion is OK. For those of faith, government is interfering with religion. Obama and liberals need to learn a lesson to keep their agnostic liberal humanism away from the Christian churches.

The Catholic nuns will file a lawsuit against the Obama White House for government violation of separation of church and state and damaging the faith of Christian church members.

Posted by: klausdmk | March 18, 2010 3:30 PM | Report abuse

navy-wings says: "It is unconstitutional as already elborated by even the most liberal Constitutional experts."

I don't believe that's true and would like to see any reliable citations. (And, no, Fox and Rasmussen Reports don't qualify.)

Having said that, the Supreme Court has proven beyond all doubt that they will do just about anything to help their GOP patrons, so who knows? Their outrageous decision in Bush v. Gore should have been all anyone needs to see how the court has been stacked with political hacks who are only interested in advancing the interests of their GOP backers (the rich and powerful).

But Citizens United has really exposed their idological slant, to the point that it's getting harder for even the most deluded to deny that the Supreme Court is now just another arm of the GOP, kind of like Fox News anchors in robes.

So who knows, maybe the GOP has a chance.

As far as your question "is speed more important than right? goes, I must remind you that we've been about this for over a year, and there has been plenty of time for the GOP to help get it right.

But the GOP only cares about stopping the bill, not improving it, so complaints now about how important it is to slow down fall flat.

Time to push the obstructionist GOP aside and get it done.

Posted by: wagner3792 | March 18, 2010 3:46 PM | Report abuse

The "process" that Bret Baier kept referring to is relevant here. This process has been used in the past by both parties, but never to ram through such an expensive, unpopular bill. This bill does nothing to address some of the real issues in reform. It merely throws money at the problem penalizing all of us in the process. Everyone with have less than adequate healthcare now. Also at risk is our AAA credit rating which will cost us dearly if we lose that. If our elected representatives on BOTH sides would leave special interest out and stop spending on all of these ridiculous pork projects, we might actually have the funds to do it right. Until then, this will never work.
-----------------------------------------
Enough with the "Ramming it Through" Lie! The bill past Both Houses in December! At this point, reconciliation is reconciling the two bills!! And since the bill has already past, where is this so-called trickery?

Posted by: Angryman | March 18, 2010 4:00 PM | Report abuse


It is no surprise Barry doesn't want to discuss or have any use for the Legislative Process. After all, he has no use for the US Constitution and has said as much. In fact Barry resents America and behind everything he wants to impose on this Nation is a desire to weaken and control her. A weakened America would then be a "fair" America in the eyes of the this Leftist Ideologue.

Elections of 2010 & 12 Cannot Come Soon Enough !!


Posted by: jas7751 | March 18, 2010 4:03 PM | Report abuse

Bret Baier was there to interview the POTUS. He was not there to listen to the POTUS give a speech he has given about 50 times before. Rude, yes POTUS was rude to the citizens of the U.S. If you agree to an interview you answer the persons questions. Not the same talking points that you have hammered to death. Did we learn any new information. NO! Just the same talking point that he is programmed to death. Mr. Baier, we appreciate your attempt to get us answers, but since your subject probably doesn't know anything other than what Polosi, Reid, Ram, and Axe tell him he had to stick to the talking points. Sorry AMERICA, we are stuck with him. Open your wallets and don't get sick. The people you are paying are in line first. The doctor is out.

Posted by: bean28141 | March 18, 2010 4:05 PM | Report abuse

Billw3, I guess it all depends who you consider having "integrity."

Show me a powerful dealmaker; and I'll show you someone who who has made concessions, or failed to make the deal.

Do you actually believe the halls of Congress to be any different than the streets of America?

No matter how many ethics classes one takes in the halls of higher education, once you get out, you're back in the real world.

You'll find that out one day, or maybe you did, but still believe in your own party's rhetorical rants for the last year.


Posted by: helloisanyoneoutthere | March 18, 2010 4:07 PM | Report abuse

Yonkers, New York
18 March 2010

No high-profile interviewer can make President Obama stumble on the critical subject of health-care reform--not Baier, not O'Reilly, not Hannity, not Beck, not Sawyer, not Walters.

The reason is that President Obama knows the subject from A to Z, and inside out. He has done his home work on health care.

Mariano Patalinjug

Posted by: MPatalinjug | March 18, 2010 4:11 PM | Report abuse

Bret Baier was SO RUDE! I remember Pres. Bush once scolding a reporter at press conference, saying something like, "I'm the President of the United States. Don't interrupt me when I'm talking." [paraphrasing] And frankly, on this rare occasion, I agreed with Pres. Bush. We may not kiss his ring or bow at the sight of our elected... leader, but reporters damn sure don't need to behave the way Bret Baier did. I was personally offended as an American.

Posted by: TeriB | March 18, 2010 4:12 PM | Report abuse

"CEOs make millions because they EARN millions, in every industry."

What total BS. CEOs make millions because they've put the Board is on the take to go to sleep in front of the compensation committee, and the stockholders are a bunch of funds whose caretakers like, really don't care. CEOs are glorified bureaucrats.

Me too, along with the peacenik there, I'd rather have my tax dollars go toward somebody else's healthcare than into the pockets of a useless middleman whose main expertise is rescission. And yes, I've paid directly for indigent friends' health care. They don't do skin cancer in the emergency room, or reconstructive dentistry. And for myself I pay for individual health insurance, out of my own budget, thanks. For as long as my budget can hold up to a geometric progression, at any rate.

I am fed up with health insurance companies, and as far as I'm concerned the only acceptable health insurance reform is a single payer plan.

Posted by: fzdybel | March 18, 2010 4:19 PM | Report abuse

Lol, all you, neo-con, tea-parters, conservatives, or WHATEVER you're calling yourselves this week, who are repeating your Faux Spews talking points here, really are hypocrites. Can you picture Pres. Bush sitting down with Keith Olbermann, and handling that kind of hostility and rudeness with such grace and intelligence? Pres. Bush usually didn't any of the details about any of his policies. He practically couldn't take un-screened questions at all.

Instead of dressing down Bret Baier, Pres. Obama patiently tried to give full and detailed responses to his inane, repetitive badgering.

Y'all really need to get a grip. Most of your leaders don't KNOW THINGS for Pete's sake. You hold up the most political ignorant woman I've ever seen in politics as some sort of Venus of Conservatism. You know, ignorance is not a virtue, and neither is the hateful, manipulative, blind, yet false patriotism you are all buying into.

And BTW, that flag you people who hate the government so much are draping yourselves in from head to toe . . .THAT IS THE MOST RECOGNIZABLE AND LITERAL SYMBOL OF THE GOVERNMENT WE HAVE. YOU ARE RIDICULOUS!

Posted by: TeriB | March 18, 2010 4:20 PM | Report abuse


helloisanyoneoutthere said:
"You'll find that out one day, or maybe you did, but still believe in your own party's rhetorical rants for the last year."

I've stated many times here on the WAPO that Bush was one of the worst things to happen to the USA. There *is* integrity to be found, but not in the vast majority, whether in government or elsewhere. The "real world" you note is not the best place to be, but one can find a little solace here and there.
.

Posted by: Billw3 | March 18, 2010 4:27 PM | Report abuse


TeriB:
"Bret Baier was SO RUDE!"

And abiding bribery is not in your book, I suppose?
.

Posted by: Billw3 | March 18, 2010 4:29 PM | Report abuse

This will be interesting. The US Constitution only refers to Bills, these are legislative actions that go to the President. Rules are not Bills, they don't go to the President. Yet the President wants Democrats in Congress to vote on a Rule as a substitute for a Bill that in fact has never passed either the Senate or the House. Evidently citizens will be permitted 72 hours to read the new, never passed Bill. Obama thus reveals his true political stripes, articulated by his kindred spirit, Malcolm X, "By Any Means Necessary."

Posted by: Zigster | March 18, 2010 4:43 PM | Report abuse

Billw3, so what the Republicans call "Chicago Politics" in your mind, is really quite different from Milton Friedman's, University of Chicago, "lasse faire" teachings of economics.

The economics that brought the overthrow of many of South American's duly elected officials, because corporations felt they were entitled to making billions off the backs of the citizens of Chile Argentina and other South American countries.

But for you and the Republicans, those kinds of deals are good, because they involved capitalism at it's finest.

Capitalism that promulgates the abolition of the minimum wage, Social Security and Medicare, labor unions and a return to slave labor.

Disgusting!


Posted by: helloisanyoneoutthere | March 18, 2010 5:00 PM | Report abuse

This will be interesting. The US Constitution only refers to Bills, these are legislative actions that go to the President. Rules are not Bills, they don't go to the President. Yet the President wants Democrats in Congress to vote on a Rule as a substitute for a Bill that in fact has never passed either the Senate or the House. Evidently citizens will be permitted 72 hours to read the new, never passed Bill. Obama thus reveals his true political stripes, articulated by his kindred spirit, Malcolm X, "By Any Means Necessary."
---------------------------------------
The BILL already Passed BOTH THE HOUSE AND SENATE!! So STOP LYING!!

Posted by: Angryman | March 18, 2010 5:04 PM | Report abuse

TonyV1,

Were you this concerned about process when Bush hoodwinked our entire country into Iraq? Were you so concerned with process when Cheney was busy steering huge contracts in rebuilding Iraq to his former company? And as for Fox, I won't even attach the word "news" to its name. You can watch Fox News for HOURS and NEVER HEAR A POSITIVE WORD ABOUT THE POTUS! How is that balanced? Or fair? It's intent is to brainwash..and I always know when I'm talking to a Fox Zombie.

Posted by: ksanders32 | March 18, 2010 5:06 PM | Report abuse


The current system of health care and insurance is unsustainable and only getting worse.

Congress needs to do something and this bill is a good start.

We could wait until health care is a complete disaster, but is that really necessary?

I mean come on, neo-cons don't even know how to use google to find out what "teabagging" really means -- and I'm supposed to trust their judgement? No way.

Posted by: tony_in_Durham_NC | March 18, 2010 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Obama has a tough interview.

Boo hoo.

I thought that's what journalists were supposed to do.

Posted by: drjcarlucci | March 18, 2010 5:21 PM | Report abuse

Hey Capehart... Not everyone loves your Obamasiah. Get over yourself... just cuz he is black doesn't mean he is someone to worship. The tingle in your leg is not something I share. Bret did a great job exposing the phony... I hope he gets another shot at him, but Obama will probably stay away.

Posted by: RobRob1 | March 18, 2010 5:25 PM | Report abuse

Why are some of you people so hateful?

Where is the unity we felt as a country following 9-11?

I'm sure most who disagree with the health care proposal do so on principled grounds, but others are downright hateful, selfish, and yes, sometimes, racist.

Those of you who believe that a woman should not have the right to choose - will you agree to support the children of the working poor? Will you support early childhood education? Should the working poor continue to fill our emergency rooms, which is vastly more expensive than preventive care?

Many other industrialized nations are surpassing us in training and technology. Don't we, as Americans, was to thrive as a nation? Don't we want to leave our children better off than we are? (the CBO says the health care proposal with decrease the deficit).

If we don't come together, we will most certainly fail in the long run as a nation.

Don't be shortsighted.

Posted by: valawyer | March 18, 2010 5:27 PM | Report abuse

A couple of things to say to those who feel the President wasn't answering the questions: As a former reporter, I know what a real interview looks like, and this wasn't one. The Fox reporter was being entirely unprofessional and obnoxious. I love the point at which he says, "I don't want to interupt you," after constantly interupting the President. As for the President repeating "talking points," one person's talking point is another person's prepared answer. When any reporter interviews at political leader, they should expect talking points. It means the person being interview has thought through the issue and knows what he wants to say. Now, if someone responds to a question by not answering it, that is a different situation, but in this case, we never got to find out if the President was going to address most questions in detail because he wasn't given the opportunity to finish what he was saying. Holding Obama to a standard to which the press doesn't hold any other politician also seems bogus.

Then there is the issue of the contents of the bill. The job of President is to review bills that have been "passed" by Congress, not to ride herd on every proposed change along the way. We can hold Obama or any President responsible for the legislation they sign, but not for every detail of what arrives on their desk.

Finally, there was a brilliant comment posted earlier claiming that the government has no business taking money from rich people and giving it to poor people. News flash: What democratic government in the history of the world hasn't done that? It's how government counteracts the fact that rich people spend most of their time taking money from poor people. A good example of a government that didn't take money from the rich and give it to the poor was the French monarchy. You may recall what happened to them.

Posted by: jdnathan | March 18, 2010 5:27 PM | Report abuse

It's fascinating to me how many people from the right who are commenting here do not understand the meaning of the word "process." They seem to think it means the language and policies contained in the bill, when it actually means, particularly in relation to this column, the mechanics of getting the bill passed. They must be using some other anguagelay.

Posted by: terryhill46 | March 18, 2010 5:28 PM | Report abuse

Stick around Barry, everyday you do your numbers go down...


March 18, 2010

Obama's Approval Rating Lowest Yet


PRINCETON, NJ -- President Barack Obama's job approval is the worst of his presidency to date, with 46% of Americans approving and 48% disapproving of the job he is doing as president in the latest Gallup Daily three-day average.


Posted by: jas7751 | March 18, 2010 5:34 PM | Report abuse

Capehart, we must have been watching different interviews, except that we were watching the same interview. From that interview, I got the impression that Obama is more of an arrogant jerk than I thought he was, and I really thought he was pretty jerky! It honestly doesn't matter if this legislation passes, because it'll be tied up in the courts for years, and the Democrats are going down with this one in November!

Posted by: georges2 | March 18, 2010 5:36 PM | Report abuse

President Obama did not answer directly one question asked of him. President Obama, by his muddled responses, made the health care bill more of the mess it seems. One things seems to be clear. That is that this President will accomplish nothing of substance during his administration that is welcome by the majority of Americans. President Obama is attempting to accomplish far more than he is capable of.

Posted by: bobbo2 | March 18, 2010 5:38 PM | Report abuse

As usual, the liberal commenters think they're the only ones who really, really understand what's going on here. And, as usual, they haven't a clue. Here it is in a nutshell: AMERICANS DO NOT WANT THE GOVERNMENT MESSING WITH THEIR HEALTHCARE. This isn't about the CBO report. This isn't about the "process." This isn't about ANYTHING except what you see in caps above. WE DON'T WANT THE GOVERNMENT MESSING WITH OUR HEALTHCARE!

Posted by: georges2 | March 18, 2010 5:41 PM | Report abuse

Hmm...I wonder how Georgie W. Bush would have performed under any "tough" interviews? As if he ever had any "tough" interviews from Fox's so-called "journalists"! Why doesn't Baier ask Bush what he thinks of the state of our ecomony and the mess he left it in? Or the trail of dead soldiers and civilians he left in Iraq while he spends his days walking the dog and living in his little dreamworld in Dallas?

Posted by: lddoyle2002 | March 18, 2010 5:43 PM | Report abuse

Obama said nothing.

he dodged every question.

The "distractions" about bribing US representatives for their votes were anything but.

Fox wanted some answers about this guy, we got a few... he's the same as any other politician... liar first, parasite second, liar third.

Posted by: docwhocuts | March 18, 2010 6:12 PM | Report abuse


helloisanyoneoutthere:

So then, are you an Obama supporter?
.

Posted by: Billw3 | March 18, 2010 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Jonathan -
You are as weak that weak sister we have for a President. Jesus, man, what a girly man you are.
I am delighted, however, that you threw out Tim Russert as a comparison to Bret Baier's professionalism and skill - I'm throwing you Charle Krauthammer. He caves to no politician. He's just plain smart. Need I say more, Jonathan?

Posted by: tponcary | March 18, 2010 7:10 PM | Report abuse

this interview was the most disrespectful and
inept by a reporter of a president or anyone
who has voluntarily agreed to answer questions. trying to fast talk and manipulate the words of the leader of the
free world with interruptions is sick real sick.

the problem that baier had was that he had little to talk about but process; and, his
talking points on that topic were weak and
interrupted when he did not get the answer
that he wanted. this idiot had no questions to ask of the president on substance of the bill. he was there trying to defend the indefensible rightwingnut opposition to healthcare reform......these people are mean spirited
and demonic. at an anti health care rally shown on msnbc, this idiots harassed
and ridiculed a crippled man with poarkinson's disease. this shows that the
democrats have to run hard over the gop for the gop to realize they, democrats, are serious.

Posted by: blacknight1 | March 18, 2010 7:15 PM | Report abuse

Why would President Obama bother to go on FOX? They are basically Repub Central and not a legitimate news organization. They yell over their guests, have snits and turn the mike off so alternative ideas can't be heard. They may consider that entertainment, but rude, offensive, bad behavior isn't entertaining.

Posted by: MNUSA | March 18, 2010 7:17 PM | Report abuse

Why would President Obama bother to go on FOX? They are basically Repub Central and not a legitimate news organization. They yell over their guests, have snits and turn the mike off so alternative ideas can't be heard. They may consider that entertainment, but rude, offensive, bad behavior isn't entertaining.

Posted by: MNUSA | March 18


Because he's losing the battle, and he needed to go on a channel that people "actually" watch. And you know what the American people saw, a arrogant POS who doesn't like to face hard questions. He acted like a manchild!

THE EGO HAS LANDED!

Posted by: cschotta1 | March 18, 2010 7:30 PM | Report abuse

So then, are you an Obama supporter?
Posted by: Billw3
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In my younger days, I'd say I followed orders. Today, as a registered Independent, I voted for Hillary Clinton in the primary. When she lost, I voted for Barack Obama for President.

Do I support him? Yes, if he makes some changes that I believe will be for the betterment of the Country.

Republicans weren't looking for the same things. Tax cuts that benefit the upper 1%. Continuing the War in Iraq, without an end in sight. Threats to invade Iran, all while running "black-ops" in the country to overthrow the government. An unregulated banking system, able to play Russian roulette with other peoples money, without accountability. Failure to bring Osama bin Laden to justice. Destroying the very fiber of our men and women in the military with unending rotations of service in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Do you want me to go on?

Do I support all of President Obama's policy initiatives? No!

But he and the Vice President are certainly better alternatives than the opposition was offering.


Posted by: helloisanyoneoutthere | March 18, 2010 7:47 PM | Report abuse

For the people that think we will be concerned with the process of this legislation six months from now, can you remember some other legislative process that has disturbed you in the recent past? What was the response of the electorate to those past legislative wrongs? Anything?

Posted by: dc13 | March 18, 2010 7:49 PM | Report abuse

Hats off to our President. Fox reminds me of a few grade school bullies. Bret was a real brat worthy of a good spanking.

Posted by: eaglehawkaroundsince1937 | March 18, 2010 7:58 PM | Report abuse

Fox viewers missed Obama handing the Republican House retreat their heads because Fox News cut away from it as soon as it became apparent that that was what was happening.

If Obama gave soundbite answers to Brett Bairs's soundbite questions, it merely indicates that Obama understands the intellectual limitations of Fox audience all to well.

Posted by: JoeBewildered | March 18, 2010 8:12 PM | Report abuse

So, has anyone ever seen Barrack Obama and Tiger Woods in the same place?

Think about it.

Posted by: branfo4 | March 18, 2010 8:26 PM | Report abuse

Some of us actually would like to hear the answers to the questions. It was quite clear that the shameless interviewer had another agenda which did not include actually having an interview. It has been a long time since Fox News actually had a legitimate reporter or professional journalist or presented any form of honest, accurate and thorough news...At least their being consistent - Greed is good, brain wash the poor and ignorant, any lie can be justified and carry out satan's work in exchange for ratings...sad...sad...sad

Posted by: TakeALookInTheMirror | March 18, 2010 8:36 PM | Report abuse

FOX has an absolute hatred for anything and all OBAMA. As posted earlier I will never forget how they cut the feed when he took the Republican house members to school and taught them the error of their ways. Cant have him come across as making sense because the FOX folks and all their ilk just don't know any better.

Baier acted like a right wing thug. Kind of man Ailes loves. That's cool. OBAMA is a blessed man and no one will steal his joy.

Posted by: llewis40 | March 18, 2010 9:09 PM | Report abuse

It may not make any difference to Josh and those who can not seem to muster compassion, but many of us do support charities and contribute to the welfare of others- but all the money I have ever made in my life will not cover the costs of the uninsured. As an older person, and a social worker, I have met hundreds of people who have struggled without health insurance, who have worked and done everything that could be asked of a person but when they were laid off in the 50s, or a spouse became terribly ill, or their grandchildren needed help- they found themselves uncovered and there certainly is not medical assistance for everyone who needs it, that is a foolish claim, in Pennsylvania alone several hundred thousand people are waiting to go on the State's low income insurance, and while they wait will pay 500-600 a month. Josh and others, if you think 600 is not insurmountable to a person with an income of 1200 and less than you are just being blind and cruel. The US is the last great nation to not provide health coverage to its citizens, our health outcomes fall each year, and no amount of "blame the poor" can change the miserable system. Its long past time to face the problems and start to get health coverage straight, so for each person here who smugly thinks they will never lose their home because of health costs, or assumes that cancer is cured in the ER- just think "there but for the grace of God go you"

Posted by: peacevoice | March 18, 2010 9:10 PM | Report abuse

The man who told us he wanted new and transparent politics is perfectly ok with the House of Representatives cramming the most massive, corrupt, and costly bill in our nations history down the throats of objecting voters, without even voting on it? Dictatorships and Tyrants impose laws without voting on them. That's not suppose to happen in the U.S. Asking questions about the corruption of Democracy are as substantive as you get. If anything not enough time was spent on Obama's willingness to take us down the path to tyranny! The rest of the interview showed just how lame Obama really is when he isn't reading from a teleprompter, and even that is getting tired. Bret Baier did a great job, although it must have been tough not to call Obama out, but the office of the Presidency deserves the level of respect that Mr. Baier gave it, even if Obama continues to diminish the dignity of the office!!!

Posted by: valwayne | March 18, 2010 9:26 PM | Report abuse

From the article:
Obama stuck to his game plan as much as possible. Over and over again he came back to his people-first talking points
-------------------------------
That was the problem. Obama was not there to give a speech but an interview. He was supposed to answer questions not filibuster with his talking points. The problem is that democrats don't like seeing their chosen one challenged since he never gets anything but softballs from the likes of this paper and all the other media. It just goes to show though that he can't take being held to task and it was a very petty performance on his part. As an independent I thoroughly enjoyed watching him show his anger that Baier was not a walkover and actually asked him tough questions that Obama unfortunately wouldn't answer. Was good to watch him also state that he doesn't bother about senate procedures especially when he was there as a Senator himself. Also good to see that he has no clue what the American people feel and that at this point procedure is much more important than the bill right now and they all stink to high heaven.

Posted by: justmyvoice | March 18, 2010 9:32 PM | Report abuse

Kudos to FNC's Baier for Tough Interview with President Obama
By Brent Bozell | Thu, 03/18/2010 - 12:16

Finally! A reporter who stands up to the media's Chosen One and isn't afraid to ask the tough questions.

Kudos to Bret Baier. He prepared for a difficult interview and came right out of the gate asking the questions that matter most to the millions of Americans protesting government takeover of health care. Other networks have had this opportunity in innumerable interviews, but Fox has proved itself to be the only network willing and capable of showing backbone and doing their journalistic duty.

How have the left-wing media reacted? While they should hang their head in humiliation for making the fair, hard questions in this interview monumental, they have instead criticized Baier's interview as ‘contentious,' as if it's unprofessional for a journalist to deviate from lapdoggery.

And we wonder why America has chosen Fox News Channel over the competition time and time again.

Read more: http://www.newsbusters.org/#ixzz0ia9gchgp


Read more: http://www.newsbusters.org/#ixzz0ia9ggA7Y

Posted by: charlietuna666 | March 18, 2010 9:36 PM | Report abuse

Kudos to FNC's Baier for Tough Interview with President Obama
By Brent Bozell | Thu, 03/18/2010 - 12:16

Finally! A reporter who stands up to the media's Chosen One and isn't afraid to ask the tough questions.

Kudos to Bret Baier. He prepared for a difficult interview and came right out of the gate asking the questions that matter most to the millions of Americans protesting government takeover of health care. Other networks have had this opportunity in innumerable interviews, but Fox has proved itself to be the only network willing and capable of showing backbone and doing their journalistic duty.

How have the left-wing media reacted? While they should hang their head in humiliation for making the fair, hard questions in this interview monumental, they have instead criticized Baier's interview as ‘contentious,' as if it's unprofessional for a journalist to deviate from lapdoggery.

And we wonder why America has chosen Fox News Channel over the competition time and time again.

Read more: http://www.newsbusters.org/#ixzz0ia9gchgp


Read more: http://www.newsbusters.org/#ixzz0ia9ggA7Y

Posted by: charlietuna666 | March 18, 2010 9:36 PM | Report abuse

Bret Baier did a great job interviewing the president.Obama simply wanted to filibuster and dodge the tougher questions.Watch the full interview and decide for yourself.The author suggests there were no "substantive" questions.I would suggest that Baier was substantive enough that the president was defensive and evasive.He was certainly not forthcoming.It also became clear the president was clueless or just dodged specifics of the many corrupt elements of Obamacare.

Posted by: bowspray | March 18, 2010 9:39 PM | Report abuse

I remember the left being mighty proud of David Gregory grilling Bush. Now their guy Barry dances and dodges under a bit of a grilling, and every liberal is running around crying with their skirts pulled over their heads.

Posted by: JohnnyGee | March 18, 2010 9:58 PM | Report abuse

This was the first time any member of the press has done his or her job vis a vis The One, The Great Messiah, The Dear Leader, The Almighty Beneficent and Omniscient Law Professor.

And The One was shown to be petulant, incoherent and ridiculous.

So Capehart, the putative journalist, feels himself obliged to comfort the powerful and attack the challenger—a journalist who actually takes his job seriously!

It's all too disheartening and disgusting for words.

For the sake of our beloved country, Oboobma and his nitwit sidekick Biden must step aside after the next Congress convenes and turn it over to Speaker Boehner.

Posted by: thebump | March 18, 2010 10:22 PM | Report abuse

Our President, Barack Obama is described on Fox News and right wing talk shows as a thug, a far left socialist and the poster boy of humiliation by showing him in white face.

The black man or women for that matter are not respected in this country and now that Barack Obama is president, the presidency is no longer held in high regard as the blacks have taken over.

As someone that grew up during the civil rights movement, white people mostly southern learned to use code words for the "N" word and that is what is happening now with Fox and the right wing.

They cannot come right out and call the President a "N" but couch it using words like thug, socialist and worse.

This is what it must have been like when social security was passed, Medicare was passed and the civil rights movement.

Just remember that one time, women were not allowed to vote and strong majorities fought against that to keep the power in the white man's corner as is today.

As the minorities increase and whites feel pressure from job outsourcing and changing rules and privileges that favored the white majority, the politics I fear will become rougher and more strident.

So far, Fox News, the right wing and the Republicans have a better media game with lockstep talking points and 24x7 Obama bashing. What president could stand up to this kind of pressure?

We are a country divided as during the civil war. Why not just split the country in half?

Posted by: culpeperson | March 18, 2010 10:40 PM | Report abuse

I did not see the interview because I am interested only in news and Fox News is not a news channel. The question is why the president demeans himself by appearing on this channel, which, from what I can see, is only watched by the mentally challenged who will never support him anyway.

By the way, in six months everyone will forget the process and applaud the results, which, however flawed, are certainly better than what we have now.

Posted by: nyrunner101 | March 18, 2010 10:43 PM | Report abuse

Now you see it - and now you don't. The Bill on the Hill isn't even written. This is the last minute trick to give us thousands of pages of graft and corruption under the guise of reform. It is a three card monte shell game card trick. It has nothing to do with reform.

It is a congressional present to the insurance and pharmaceutical industries. It does nothing to restrain costs or offer tort reform or allow citizens to get their medicine from Canada or Mexico. We are being hoodwinked into believing it is reform.

Posted by: alance | March 18, 2010 10:49 PM | Report abuse

Gotta love the moonbats who have embedded themselves so firmly in their Messiah's exalted anus that they regard the most basic tenets of democracy as mere "process" and "mechanics".

Posted by: thebump | March 18, 2010 10:50 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Capeheart,

Please write an article about the election of Bacrack Obama and what it meant to black Americans.

African Americans and people of color all over the word witnessed a historic occasion with the election of our President, Barack Obama and his beautiful family.

No doubt while we were enthralled at the inauguration of the president, I imagine that many whites’ folks were in shock and disbelief that a black man was now the president.

I'm sure that soon after, the machinery went to work to discredit Barack Obama, his family and the democrats as they could not stand to let African Americans enjoy any moment of kind admiration for our new president.

The Republicans picked up on this and now with the aid of Fox News have tried to do as much damage as they can to the president. The Democrats in congress seem to in a parallel universe and seen leaderless and unfocused.

Many of the press and media seem to be trying to join the Fox bandwagon to boost ratings including CNN and Wolf Blitzer.

I suspect many of the media and so called Democrats listen to Fox and Rush Limbaugh as they become older and acquire more wealth. Leave the Democrats to the Jews and minorities and fool the middleclass into believing that the Republicans are for their interest.

Kind of like Animal Farm. Black is white, up is down. Watch Fox News as it suits what you believe in and don't discuss the facts as they don't fit what I think!

Posted by: culpeperson | March 18, 2010 10:55 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Capehart speaks for me on this issue, and I'd guess I'm not alone.

Posted by: douglaslbarber | March 18, 2010 11:11 PM | Report abuse

Bret Baier did what no other media interviewer has done with Obama. He asked the hard questions, and pressed Obama for the answers. Obama came off looking like a stumbling, bumbling idiot who did not have the answers, and who tried to BS his way out.

The liberals laughed an at unprepared Sarah Palin during her TV interviews in the 2008 campaign. Obama's performance last night made Palin look like a pro.

Posted by: mike85 | March 18, 2010 11:37 PM | Report abuse

Regardless of the history between Fox News and the Office of the President, Obama is the US President and should be given the respect enjoyed by all previous Presidents. It seems the intention of Fox News was to insult the Office of the President, the people who elected him, and not provide what viewers would like to see, questions regarding the legislation.

tomski12, who do you think is paying for uncovered care and uninsured now?
----------------

You must not have not watched the same interview as I did. Baier repeatedly asked
Obama about specifics of the bill and
Obama repeatedly said that he wouldn't know what was in the bill until he saw the finished product, along with everybody else. What Baier did was ask hard questions that no other interviewer had asked, and ones that Obama didn't want to answer.

Posted by: mike85 | March 18, 2010 11:51 PM | Report abuse

I believe Baier was trying to anger the President so much he would walk out of the interview. Having an interview where a Fox commentator shows Obama no respect is red meat for the Fox audience, but I really think it was a fallback position. Better he should lose his temper as Bill Clinton did with Chris Wallace's smarmy interviewing, and they could spin his anger as petulance or defensiveness or being ill-prepared. Best of all, he takes off his microphone and walks away. Then they can make a whole story out of that: Fox's man vanquishes the President, who quits the field in despair. I'm sure this is what Fox intended to do all the time.

Posted by: ducdebrabant | March 19, 2010 12:11 AM | Report abuse

What a joke. If this President wasn't such a big "wuz". He would have given more then 15 min for the interview. I guess he doesn't want to be revealed. In just 15 min, I realized this "pres" doesn't even have a clue what's in the bill.

Posted by: beatles1920 | March 19, 2010 12:45 AM | Report abuse

What a joke. If this President wasn't such a big "wuz". He would have given more then 15 min for the interview. I guess he doesn't want to be revealed. In just 15 min, I realized this "pres" doesn't even have a clue what's in the bill.

Posted by: beatles1920 | March 19, 2010 12:45 AM | Report abuse


helloisanyoneoutthere:
"Do I support all of President Obama's policy initiatives? No! But he and the Vice President are certainly better alternatives than the opposition was offering."

We have gone full cycle, and I disagree. I supported Clinton, then McCain. Obama's record of integrity is severely lacking, as compared to McCain, and I certainly do not approve of Obama's socialist leaning. The drawback with McCain was Palin, but she ain't looking all that bad right now.
.

Posted by: Billw3 | March 19, 2010 12:45 AM | Report abuse

If this President wasn't such a big "WuZ". He would have given more than 15 min for the interview. Actually, Brett in 15 minutes was able to make the President look uninformed and clueless about the whole issue. Sort of verified PELOSI AND REID are running the country.

Posted by: beatles1920 | March 19, 2010 12:48 AM | Report abuse

Bret Baier succeeded in getting Obama to endorse a fundamental statement of principle that will plague him for the rest of his political career: “I care not for process but for substance.” This is his version of “The end justified the means,” and is the antithesis of the principles of justice. This was Lenin’s principle, and today it is practiced by Chavez. Obama in effect said that he will do anything to accomplish his goals, in this case to save his presidency.

Posted by: suegbic1 | March 19, 2010 4:09 AM | Report abuse


You didn't even need to have the sound turned on. It was so predictable. The POTUS tries to sell his plan, FOX tries to paint him as a failure and a threat. Nothing new. 18,000 Fox emails say it's baaaad. 40,000 Pres emails say it's needed. Who knows? One fact = 30 million Americans wihout health care, losing health care, can't get health care, denied health care and priced out of health care and it's getting worse.

Posted by: MikeA3

Mike, you really don't want to know that you will be paying taxes retroactive to January 2010 to pay for HC for the next four years before any HC kicks in?

Wouldn't you have liked to hear about that from the Pres?

For those who think the Fox interviewer was rude. Don't you think it is rude of the Pres and Congress to lie to you every single day? Especially when they tell you that the Bill they are spending billions on to pass.....well, they really don't know what is in it?

They know that they will get control over 50% of the income of Americans and control the economy.

But hey, that's all they want...just to control every aspect of your life.

Such as when the Bill passes they will require you to buy insurance if you don't have insurance. And they will fine you if you do not buy it. Then they will check your account every month to make sure you are paying on it.

So quit telling me about the 30 million people and people are dying. No benefits for the next four years but you will be paying taxes on it.

People will continue to die everyday just as they always have. The rate will just speed up once Obamacare takes over.

Posted by: letscheck | March 19, 2010 4:37 AM | Report abuse

these liberal columnists are so clearly in the tank for obama, so willing to give him carte blanche to do anything without questioning his authority to do so or promises to set a different example in how things are done in washington, you wonder why they even bother.

and if brett baier actually wants to be a real journalist and question the most power person on the planet, well, good for him. thats what being a journalist is SUPPOSED to be about, except when democrats are the ones breaking their biggest campaign promises by attempting end-runs around the constitutionally mandated procedure for passing a bill.

Posted by: dummypants | March 19, 2010 10:00 AM | Report abuse

spare us the propaganda jon.

it hardly matters what questions baier asked because the president responds with whatever talking points are on his agenda, even if they are totally off point and non-responsive.

if the president hadnt answered the process questions with off point fillibustering about the substance of the bill (basically arguing that the ends justify the means) then baier could have moved on to substance questions. as it is obama talked about the substance of the bill the entire time. of course, there is little news to made on that front. this is essentially the same bill voters rejected from the senate and the house dating back to august, the one americans know is going to break the bank no matter if it "technically" cuts the deficit by a measley 1% and only does that use of enron style accounting.

Posted by: dummypants | March 19, 2010 10:03 AM | Report abuse

spare us the propaganda jon.

it hardly matters what questions baier asked because the president responds with whatever talking points are on his agenda, even if they are totally off point and non-responsive.

if the president hadnt answered the process questions with off point fillibustering about the substance of the bill (basically arguing that the ends justify the means) then baier could have moved on to substance questions. as it is obama talked about the substance of the bill the entire time. of course, there is little news to made on that front. this is essentially the same bill voters rejected from the senate and the house dating back to august, the one americans know is going to break the bank no matter if it "technically" cuts the deficit by a measley 1% and only does that use of enron style accounting.

Posted by: dummypants | March 19, 2010 10:03 AM | Report abuse

spare us the propaganda jon.

it hardly matters what questions baier asked because the president responds with whatever talking points are on his agenda, even if they are totally off point and non-responsive.

if the president hadnt answered the process questions with off point fillibustering about the substance of the bill (basically arguing that the ends justify the means) then baier could have moved on to substance questions. as it is obama talked about the substance of the bill the entire time. of course, there is little news to made on that front. this is essentially the same bill voters rejected from the senate and the house dating back to august, the one americans know is going to break the bank no matter if it "technically" cuts the deficit by a measley 1% and only does that use of enron style accounting.

Posted by: dummypants | March 19, 2010 10:05 AM | Report abuse

Commenters to this forum who criticize the reporter for trying to get answers to his substantive questions are the very people driving the profits of Procter and Gamble through the roof. There is a nationwide run on PAMPERS, a product very popular with the bedwetters.

Obama is like one of those wind-up characters sold on street corners in NYC. Live Pavlov's dog, Obama automatically responds to certain words and launches into a spiel containing the same crap we've been listening to for his last 782 appearances on TV and at staged "townhall" meetings packed with ringers. MSNBC displayed a montage of interruptions by Baier and the left-wing panel and their corpulent host with freshly applied Just-for-Men decried the "lack of respect" for the president. Of course, anybody who watched the interview appreciates the dishonesty in that presentation. Missing was the filibustering answers advanced by the clearly frustrated interviewee, who underwent the first interview by a questioner who wasn't wearing kneepads.

The reason these rags masquerading as Pinnacles of Truth are losing readers and money like a sieve and outlets like MSNBC are drawing fewer viewers than the Cartoon Channel is their basic perception that we, the American body politic, are morons who will swallow their bilge no matter what effluent it contains.

The American People are on a path to return the Republic to the tenets of the Constitution. Arrogant criticisms and derisive characterizations of legitimate protests only serve to strengthen the resolve of citizens who WILL take back our country.

Posted by: GyStryker | March 19, 2010 10:24 AM | Report abuse

Finally a real journalist gets to take Obama to task and call him on his lies.

Thank you Bret.

Posted by: IUT1 | March 19, 2010 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Capehart criticizing someone else about asking 'substantive' questions to obama? Who does this guy think he is kidding?

Capehart is a charter member of the "in the Tank for obama" club... you know, the ones that felt a tinkle down their legs whenever their lord obama spoke.... the ones that never saw a falsehood in an obama lie... the ones that can't read polls and are clueless about the American middle class... The arrogant, elitist, snob ones...

The ones that look pretty sleazy & crooked now after supporting the chicago style of governing.

Get lost, capehart.

Posted by: wilsan | March 19, 2010 5:42 PM | Report abuse

Obama is a lair. Fox just shows why this negro userper need to be impeached or assasinated.

Posted by: SavedGirl | March 19, 2010 8:49 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company