You do have to wonder whether if Obama is this unfriendly towards the press after such a brief career how bad he'll get after a few more years of the kind of badgering a president has to put up with.

Dave

The press has diminished it's own importance by it's excess enthusiasm for political drivel and unhealthy appetite for Red Herring.

They (you) have forfeited their lofty position in political discourse by allowing themselves to be bought by inconsequential trivia.

Thus, the news-interested public has been abandoning traditional press for several years. Newspapers are failing, reporters laid off, etc.

At the other end, only traditionalists, like McCain, are still interested in feeding the press's appetites.

At the same time that the members of the press have become the tame pets of the politicians they have also become more conservative in fact (while they may deny it to their liberal friends and the idea is rountinely scoffed at by their conservative friends) because they must win the approval of those establishment politicians. This makes them supportive of the establishment (even if it's Bill Clintons establishment).

Reporters depend on access to political sources, both acknowledged and unacknowledged, to write articles, get promotions and get pay increases. So they suck up to the powerful.

So, tell me true: if you could ask Obama a question what would it be about? Would you ask his ideas on the Farm Bill or the new GI Bill for Iraq/Afghanistan veterans? Or would you spear him with a question about Rev. Wright?

And, since you seem to have ready access to John McCain, what questions have you actually asked him? And have you asked him about his enthusiasm for John Hagee?

Do you let your personal views determine questions that you ask candidates?

You're not allowed to ask any questions about Obama.


Shut up and repeat after me.


"Change we can beleive in."

"Yes we can."

NOw don't you feel better?

To be fair, McCain also has a long history of being frustrated with reporters. Yes, he will give them a great deal of slack and sit endlessly being interviewed and answering questions. He likes being accessible. But at the same time, he's just as impatient as Obama when asked the kind of stupid and inappropriate questions some reporters like to use to goad public figures.

Dave

Dave, I almost clicked away without responding to your comment.

The urge to ask a flippant question about why you're so reasonable all of a sudden (recent orgasm etc...) just wasn't enough.

So, well, I froze.

Damn, it's hard to believe that you've written something as lucid as comment #4.

Well said, Dave.

I Seem to remember McCain hurling some salty expletives at reporters.

I've watched press conferences where some reporter asks a loaded question, a rhetorical question, that is not intended to elicit information but to embarrass the politician.

Yeah, like

"Is it true that you've stopped beating your wife?"

I wonder if we will be allowed by the great Barry to question anything his wife may publicly say in the future that directly opposes the beliefs and values of millions of Americans.

As long as what she says publicly stays in the future, we've no way to question it.

By the way, is it true that you've stopped beating your wife in the future?

C'mon Bennett...it's just a matter of time before Michelle let's her anger and her bitterness get to her and says something while publicly campaigning for her husband that offends millions of people.

But I guess Michelle is allowed to go on national TV, say whatever she wants about anything she wants and the rest of us aren't allowed to actually have an opinion of her words, the very words she herself voluntarily offered up for public consumption, if that opinion does not conform to the "Michele is so super wonderful and would make an excellent first lady" talking point. Instead we must suffer the wrath of Barry who tells us that although his wife has insulted us we must just shut up and smile about it.

Ah, I don't know about that Arch. Only time will tell, but she may have gotten the message that life under the magnifying glass requires a lack of candor, and a need to stay 'on message'.

Politics aint real life.

I'm just one of the other millions who wasn't insulted by what she said. But I fight to the death for your right to be insulted!

:-)

It is part of modern day politics to speak against the media. Regan started it and off course we know that the Reps have worn it to the ground until the media is no longer effective.

If Obama can tell us who he is and what he wants to do, answer questions in a debate and respond to difficult accusations, spin and slander without feeding the make me a star hungry journalists, it is perfectly fine. Don't we like savvy?

I have less problems with a politician insulting a reporter than with a reporter who asks rhetorical questions or questions that have nothing to do with important issues.

This article is a piece of crap. All you have cited here is a few incidents where he has limited access or refused to answer questions. Do you want to bet I could find 100 similar quotes from John McCain?

Quick checklist:
-Obama has attended over 20 debates far more than McCain has.
-The media has for the most part, found Obama very open to the press, especially compared to Hillary Clinton.
-John McCain has had a tremendous temper with questions he doesn't like.
-Obama has answered 100s of thousands of questions in the last year. Is there anything you're unclear about still or were you just not paying attention?


Now even more interesting IMO is that the GOP has accused the press of favoring Obama, while simultaneously accusing Obama of being unfriendly to the media. You can't have it both ways. Pick a strategy and stick with it. Is he buddy-buddy with the media, or does is he unfriendly and refuse to answer their questions?

Meanwhile, McCain has gotten to pick what he wants to talk about, where he wants to talk about it, and when. No tough questions, no debate, nothing.

Is Obama the first "affirmative action" billionaire?

Is Obama the first "affirmative action" billionaire?

I don't know what you mean by that. Either way you're grossly incorrect.
-he's not a billionaire, far from it. People like Bill O'Reilly, G.W.B, Cheney, Clintons etc... are all far richer
-he's not in favor of affirmative action in the traditional sense. He's in favor of the 4 conservative judges + O'connor decision to prohibit quota systems when it comes to affirmative action. It must instead be administered on a case by case basis and not be based solely on race, but rather on the sum total of obstacles a student had to overcome to get where he/she got. Sounds reasonable to me.