Bret Baier adds "respectful" to Special Report sign off
March 18, 2010 7:31 pm ET
From the March 18 edition of Fox News' Special Report:
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
Mr. News
Then you interview a Democratic president who is far more intellectually serious than either you or W., and you act like a petulant little punk who has no respect for than man or the office, and assumes that everything he's saying is B.S.
If I claimed to be a journalist and acted this way, I would--and I am not being hyperbolic here--kill myself.
In spite of being provided with links showing precisely how subservient Bret Baier was well interviewing G.W. Bush, diamonds prefers to remain ignorant and spout nonsense.
And isn't that the definition of a FAUX News fan?
~
I'm talking about the Fox trick of making everything associated with the Democrats look like a controversy by raising every objection they can think of--some with a kernel of truth, some just out-and-out lies--while making everything associated with the Republicans look like the plain and obvious truth, by simply accepting everything without question.
It's called propoganda.
Like I said, if I ever find myself acting like that, I will literally kill myself. I would sooner die than be that much of an unprincipled sellout.
It's toxic. It will take a generation or more to recover from it if it were to stop immediately.
It's why the Obama White House called out FoxNews a few months back - because their behavior hurts America! Their lies, distortions, and omissions of relevant information to further a conservative agenda, along with the other guilty parties like Newsbusters and Michael Savage and Rush Limbaugh and Neil Boortz and Michelle Malkin and Ann Coulter.
But you're right that the time we spend clearing away bad arguments would be better spent trying to develop good ones. The undergrowth of hateful and dishonest commentary makes it hard for responsible citizens to maneuver.
Saying that tort reform is a major way to resolve the cost issues WRT healthcare, for example, is bogus, and so we have to continually explain that - but if they'd simply say that it is ONE way to do it, and we could explain to them that not only is it a tiny fraction of the cost of healthcare, but in addition it seems unfair to the people INJURED by malpractice and misdeeds that their awards be severely limited, we could then have a debate on which is more important - lower tort costs, with a potential cost savings (that a couple of states which enacted tort reform haven't seen!), or acknowledgement that other changes would bring a much bigger cost savings and should be gone after first so as to NOT disadvantage injured patients!
And after the rightwingers stopped mechanically repeating the nonsense that tort reform would be a great part of the solution, Dems said that "sure, even though it's STILL not a great idea, we'll agree to do it to make you happy."
But because the bozos are in charge of the party instead of the reasonable ones, they never see the value in bipartisanship, compromise and collegiality.
check this out
Damn that Huffpo! They just had a link to the Thinkprogress post, and Huffpo takes forever to load on this pc.
~
Bullsh!t.
One cannot call oneself a "reporter" and work at Fox.
That is self-evident.
There's your first mistake.
"I'm sorry if your (presumably) favorite president..."
You presume wrong.
"...is getting asked tough questions but that was his job and the entire purpose of the interview"
Yawn, the "Obama never gets any tough questions" canard. And if asking tough questions is Baier's job, then why didn't he do his job with Bush? Oh, that's right, you didn't see that interview and "don't care."
"If it so happens that Obama had never been asked about Medicare and the budget deficit..."
Lies. He has been, and has sat with at least three high-profile (and generally hostile) Fox News interviewers: O'Reilly, Garret & Baier. Given that that network routinely compares him to mass murderers and says he's scheming to destroy the nation, he's gone further out of his way to engage them than most would.
"...does that really make it partisan?"
And another sorry trope rears its pathetic head. "The press is all librul, so Fox is Fair & Balanced by being ideologically ten miles right of center" bit doesn't sell here.
The President went into this "interview" with the Media Arm of the Republican Party with his eyes open and his purpose clear. He was there to sell Health Care Reform to people who've only heard attacks on it, and Baier was there to gut it. They were each fighting to control the language. All of Baier's questions were devoted to process, because polls show that when process leads the discussion, support for HCR drops. However, when the actual substance of the bill is discussed, and the programs and benefits are brought into the conversation, support rises. That's why the Chief Executive refused to get bogged down by legislative process questions. He would have been playing into Murdochian hands. More power to him.
ROFLOL!
Tell us please, is it physically painful to lie thru the teeth like you do?
You tr0lls really need to go back to the glenn drek forums, I hear they're running short on drooling sycophants this week
Diamonds, you are free to pretend that you can't remember yesterday, just like the rest of your intellectually challenged brethren.
And we're free to keep rubbing your noses in it.
~
How, pray tell, could someone answer a question while being interrupted? Now, if you tried to post that comment and I unplugged your computer before you could finish...would that mean that you didn't comment or had no comment? If you got half way, and I moved the goal posts so you had to start over to address the new direction? It's exactly what Bret Baier did, he completely interrupted every answer that didn't come within the first sentence.
And President Obama was not there to talk only healthcare. It was billed all over Fox as an exclusive interview with the President and it turned out to be an attack on the President's support of the health care reform, complete with attacking questions and interrupted answers...in other words, what they normally do to people they disagree with.
Of course, this rule applies only to Democrats. If you're a Republican, then rigging elections means the voters has been expressed and you have a mandate.
No, for being incredibly rude, disrespectful, ill-informed and spouting GOP talking points.
diamonds whines some more: " I don't follow"
We can all see that, snapperhead.
I Found None, Why The First Black President Bret? Why the Drama?
He's a Socialist, He's a Communist, He's a Fascist, this is the Fox Creed.
Hate for the Sake of Hating Bret? You deserve a Bonus for your Evil Deed.
Speak truth to power.
Mr. News
An example: I go into a department store, and I have more than enough money to pay for what I want. I get followed around the store by some clerk as if I am there to steal something when stealing is the last thing on my mind. I usually leave immediately. They never realize that I'm better educated and make more money being retired than the manager of the store. It's called shopping while black. This kind of thing happens to me quite frequently. The same thing happened to my daughter not 2 weeks ago.
Interrupting an answer to a question you just asked. Journalistic etiquette demands an answer free of duress, which includes interrupting and presenting straw man arguments. It was frustrating to watch, I could only imagine what it would be like to try to answer but keep being interrupted.
Another wingnut who can't remember yesterday.
Here, Ingemar. When interviewing a white republican president who lied us into a war and doubled the national debt, Bret Baier remembers "Presidential Butt-kissing 101" quite well.
(Note: this is a transcript, so "NSFW" tag not needed.)
~
If you don't know that, then you have NO business trying to school US on what journalists are supposed to do when interviewing a president.
FOX (air quotes) News: Fair & Balanced arm of the Teabagging Neocons.
That's also another difference between him and W. If W were ever treated this way, he would have wilted like a poisoned flower. Oh, and then his cabal would have whined like babies and flooded the airwaves with claims of horrible injustice for the next five months.
It doesn't matter what forum he's in -- Obama is smarter, better informed, deliberate in his responses and precise in his language.
He was not my first choice for president, but honestly, after having George W. Bush set high standards for arrogance and conceit and low standards for communications skills, honesty and competence, isn't Obama a welcome change?
Both - sums up the entire Fox News audience and workplace, too boot.
The MM idiotic liberals can all cry together, but even analysts on MSNBC think that Brett did a great job last night.
Actually, I don't really care if a reporter is respectful or not to a politician. In fact, if a politician is spouting bs I want the reporter to call them out on it.
However..... Baier wasn't trying to get truth out of power. He was doing a partisan hack job for Fox (aka, the Republican propaganda wing). Secondly, as mentioned by others, they didn't show this spirit of antagonism with the previous administration.
If you really want to hear someone aggressively asking about questions of substance listen to Amy Goodman's 2000 interview with Bill Clinton.
Not that there was any serious doubt of this, of course. Fox is not just a conservative news network; it's the GOP's most powerful tool, and they're solely focused on gaining back political power.