Monday, February 3, 2014

O'Reilly and Obama

What did you think of the O'Reilly interview of President Obama?   I didn't listen but I just watched half the video and read a couple of articles with quotes from the exchange.

The most despicable part of it, for me, was when Obama said, about the IRS situation " ... These kinds of things keep on surfacing, in part because you and your TV station will promote them."    "Promote them," or cover news about these things as they happen, Mr. Obama?

Does Mr. Obama really think the IRS targeting Conservatives is only worrisome because FOX covers news as it occurs?

"Obama said he had characterized the attack as an act of terror the day after it took place."  This might be true, but I remember many pundits talking soon after all this happened, on both sides,  who'd disagree with this.  Do you have a link that proves this one way or the other?  I find it interesting that a few of the venues I read found it necessary to use that quote above many others, making me believe it might not be quite true?

O'Reilly: "You understand that a lot of Americans feel that you're a big government liberal who wants to intrude on their personal freedom?" 
Obama (tittering): "A lot of folks who watch you, Bill, believe that!"
O'Reilly: "They think (that) way worse than me."
Obama: "I've got to give you credit, you've got a pretty big viewership...so you're pretty persuasive."
Actually, O'Reilly often gives Obama a break on many issues. 

Did you listen, and what did you think?

Z

55 comments:

Constitutional Insurgent said...

I caught most of it via excerpts.

Yawn.

Neither party was impressive. O'Reilly even invoked 'some people say', a signature caricature line for Fox. I've seen him better than this, so I'm at a loss for why he softballed this interview.

After Benghazi, Obama did refer to the event as an "act of terror", more than once. But their charade obviously went downhill from there.

I'm not sure many Republicans would take issue with similar jabs at MSNBC when the GOP takes back the White House. But it's not professional demeanor for a POTUS.

Thersites said...

Why would I waste my time listening to a conversation between two idiots?

Stitch Head (D) said...

Stop linking your stupid spam to my blog, PD!

Always On Watch said...

The entire interview and Gateway Pundit's take. Overall, I agree with GP.

Obama's blame game is nothing more and nothing less than smoke and mirrors.

Always On Watch said...

BHO: "I promise you that we'll hold everybody up and down the line accountable."

What are his promises worth? Hmmmm?

Always On Watch said...

Thersites,
Zing! Gotta agree with you.

WomanHonorThyself said...

hiya Z..:) I dont think they should sit across a table from him as if he were a respectable citizen..it gives this monster credibility actually...have an awesome week hun:)

Always On Watch said...

Obama told O'Reilly that nothing was going on at the IRS. Just a few months back, he called it an outrageous scandal. HERE is the video proof.

Waylon said...

Did O'Reilly give Obama a bigger audience than the SOTU where apparently only about 10% watched that pile of crap?

Mustang said...

I have no patience with either O'Reilly or Obama. I did not watch it.

Duckys here said...

O'Reilly is still pushing on IRS and Benghazi?

Hillary is laughing.

sue hanes said...

Z - I didn't know about the interview so I didn't watch it. I do remember a couple of years ago when O'Reilly interviewed the president and was extremely rude.
So I guess he was given a second chance.

Kaz. said...

O'Reilly hoped that he was going to get some answers on Benghazi, IRS, "you can keep it", etc. But all he got nothing but the same old lies and the same old excuses.

Sam Huntington said...

The purpose of O'Reilly's interview was to satisfy O'Reilly's narcissism. He should follow his own advice: no bloviating.

Z said...

CI...the problem is Some people DO SAY....Do you want him to name names?
And maybe some of the GOP wouldn't take issue, but I take issue at any president who slams any particular news venue, particularly the number one news venue in the land.

I don't believe Obama used "terror" the day after it happened.

I do take issue with O'Reilly's asking if Paneta used the word TERROR when he told Obama about the attacks. To me, it's not important; as Obama said "when people kill 4 others, it's always terror" One needn't say THE WORD. But, no...TERROR was not used for quite a while after the attacks.

AlwaysOnWatch...good catch on the IRS.

What startled me when I heard it this morning (I didn't watch the interview but read about it and saw clips) was when Obama said they're 1 million below target now, at 3 million signed up for Obamacare when the promises were "7 million by March".

Ducky, very few people are left who think Benghazi and the IRS aren't issues that need to be resolved. They're going to stonewall Benghazi FOREVER (for Hillary's sake, of course)..the IRS is probably the biggest scandal in a LONG time. Americans don't expect their internal revenue service to pick on one party. It's unbelievable. And true.

Waylon; they say that's why Obama did it at all; MUCH MUCH bigger audience than the pitiful few who saw the SOTU.
My goodness, he sure didn't do himself any favors, however. SO thin skinned and constantly blaming O'Reilly for his own woes...not good taste and a little sick, in my opinion.
Let's face it, his background of broken home, racial division, hateful mentors, Chicago politics.....who the heck could have taught him the dignity of being president and NOT BLAMING everybody else for his troubles? You almost can't blame the man.

Sue, can you link or quote where O'Reilly was extremely rude?
And what should O'Reilly ask "How're the kids?" when SO many horrible things have been happening from the IRS, the NSA, Benghazi, the healthcare fiasco?
Just curious what you meant by 'extremely rude' because I don't remember hearing that at all.


Z said...

Sam, I agree; O'Reilly can be terribly self-congratulatory.
At least this time he didn't have that "I GOT THIS INTERVIEW!!" look the whole time he was asking Obama questions. Honestly, in the previous interview, O'Reilly looked scared to death, in my opinion, and went so softball in his questions because of that.

At least this time he asked the questions people want answers to.

Z said...

actually, tonight on his show he's going to show clips he didn't show last night.

and he asked interesting stuff.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

"I don't believe Obama used "terror" the day after it happened."


http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/10/world/libya-attack-statements/index.html

Z said...

CI, thanks...I so well remember media on both sides wondering why Obama didn't call it an act of terror right of way.
What did they expect, five minutes after it happened as "right away?"

It was still touted as a reaction to the movie (is that guy STILL in prison?)..terror or not. He'd never use 'islamist terror'...

I still think O'Reilly was unrealistic regarding the issue I already wrote about above.....parsing words is ridiculous.

But I was glad O'Reilly wasn't as softball as he was last year.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

Z - I agree completely. I could rail on endlessley about how poorly constructed the Administrations Benghazi narrative was and how it fails on every level.

Duckys here said...

Ducky, very few people are left who think Benghazi and the IRS aren't issues that need to be resolved. They're going to stonewall Benghazi FOREVER (for Hillary's sake, of course)..the IRS is probably the biggest scandal in a LONG time.
----
There was NO IRS scandal.

Lara Logan and the NYT have put Benghazi to bed. Even Issa's panel came up with nothing.

Scandals?

The TPP fast track.

Formaldehyde from the West Virginia chemical spill. No regulation on chemical storage which has put a serious carcinogen in the environment while the owners declare bankruptcy and shift their assets.

Keystone pipeline and the suckers who think it will lower energy costs in America.


Oh there are some scandals out there alright. And whining about Benghazi only hardens low information Republicans as an obstacle to resolution.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

"Lara Logan and the NYT have put Benghazi to bed. Even Issa's panel came up with nothing."

You mean other than the fact that the attack was not inspired by a video and that Ansar al-Shari’a in Benghazi and Ansar al-Shari’a in Darnah are al Qaeda emulation franchises?

Z said...

Well, if LARA LOGAN and THE NY TIMES are putting it to bed, they MUST be right!

Darryl Issa's committee...really? Want to know my new mantra? "If you want a true scandal to disappear, just have Issa do a hearing on it..POOF!, it's gone!"

ridiculous.

And to even suggest there's "no IRS scandal" is (no offense) just plain STUPID.

CI...please take over; educate Ducky. Thanks.

Z said...

Anonymous...don't look now, but I think the media's all OVER the Christie story...and we're well aware of the details here, too.

The only thing I disagree with you on is Hillary and Benghazi; the media's doing a smashing job of keeping her away from it. Most Americans don't even know what happened there; this won't hurt Hillary.

Pris said...

To my mind, comparing a big traffic jam to four Americans murdered, is ridiculous.

The state run media of course, will use anything to keep the cover up about Benghazi from the news!

I'm no big fan of Christie, but really, there's talk of impeachment of Christie which is nonsense. If a political liar should be impeached, I know who I would choose, and it's not Christie

But, like I've said before, the inmates are running the asylum!!

Duckys here said...

Cover up of what?

There has been a congressional investigation that stated Susan Rice was simply repeating the intel she was given by the CIA.

The congressional report states that there was a spontaneous demonstration which morphed into an opportunity for hard core Islamists.

Ambassador Stevens had turned down offers of additional security.

No evidence that an American military response would have prevented casualties.

Just what is being covered up?

Oh, still know word on what operation the CIA was running out of Benghazi. Yeah, that.

This is what passes as an issue on the right.

Now, what did everyone expect would be the result of O'Really's interview. You really expect some hard news?

We are a sorry people.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

Ducky, I'm not referring to nor claiming a cover-up. I'm talking about the repeatedly missed indicators and warnings by State and the Administration prior to the attack, and the absurd official narrative after the attack.

Administration supporters continue to prop up a straw man of their own making by pretending anytime anyone brings up Benghazi, they're propagating some truther conspiracy. It saves them from having to defend the actual missteps and errors that occurred...and that took the lives of four Americans.

Thersites said...

unless it's in Pravda (NY Times)... it NEVER happened!

right, duck?

A sorry people, indeed!

Mustang said...

My question for Ducky is this: Is it not important when officials of the US government intentionally lie or mislead the American people in to thinking of the events in Benghazi as one thing, when IN FACT they were just the opposite?

The question is important because if you now argue that it doesn’t matter, then you identify yourself with that kind of dishonesty. So tell us, which is it? It matters, or it doesn’t matter?

Z said...

Mustang..well said.

Ducky....what would you have recommended O'Reilly ask Obama?

(see you tomorrow, right?)

Impertinent said...

@Ducky:

Currently, oil or its derivatives is shipped in this country by rail or tanker truck.

Wouldn't the pipeline shorten the distances we are transporting oil and its derivatives?

Wouldn't that decrease the likelihood of an accident(s) like we saw in North Dakota recently?

Further, wouldn't that decrease the CO2 emissions expelled in transporting it?


Seems like the pipeline is an overall win on the balance sheet. To be sure, there are monied interests behind the pipeline, but aren't there similar monied interests behind continuing to transport oil and its derivatives by rail (e.g. Warren Buffet's Burlington Northern railroad)?

Impertinent said...

@Prisc:

"o my mind, comparing a big traffic jam to four Americans murdered, is ridiculous..."

Of course it is...but if you've ever driven anywhere in Jersey...you'd know that even without the bridge closing it's a struggle to get around or home. I know why everyone in Jersey is always angry...it's their entire infrastructure that sux.

Z said...

Imp, that railway connection's supposedly quite close to Obama..donors, or something. Well, we know Buffet is a donor.
But, even closer.
Sort of like the woman who got the website work for healthcare $$$$

Impertinent said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Z said...

Folks:

Re the tragic life of Philip Seymour Hoffman (I won't say tragic death because his life sounds even more tragic, having been into heroin for years, having fathered 3 children without marrying their mother, etc etc)...I'm reading articles this evening that say that the cops are now saying it wasn't suicide.

Who the heck said suicide in the first place? Do they know what WE know? That he was an addict after having been clean for many years, that he had MANY bags of heroin around the place, and that he died with the needle still in his arm?
And they thought it was SUICIDE when there are apparently hundreds of deaths recently from bad junk?

Sometimes law enforcement surprises me...ya know?

Impertinent said...

@Z:


How much richer does that old fart need anyway? Good God...he can't take it with him and he knows it...Gates too.

Z said...

Imp.... I'm not talking about Buffet....not directly........My question is how much does Obama get from it for thwarting pipeline construction in favor of his buddy's railroad $$?

Z said...

Then there's this news about the IRS reinstating employee bonuses to those who did wrong:

"The announcement was made by new IRS Commissioner John Koskinen, who said the performance bonuses were reinstated after agency employees repeatedly asked him about them during his first weeks on the job and after reaching a deal with the Union for Federal Employees."

Ah, they asked him REPEATEDLY so he gave in? ARE YOU KIDDING MEEE?

"The targeting scandal broke in spring 2013 when the agency revealed it had targeted for closer scrutiny Tea Party groups and other politically conservative organizations that were applying for tax-exempt status."

"Revealed"...REVEALED. IT DID IT.

and here we have libs still in denial.

OY

Impertinent said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Z said...

Imp, no, I'm not quite that utterly cynical.

Liberal...call me and my readers morons again and you'll never have a comment here last more than five minutes. Byeeee

Z said...

Also, Imp...if it wasn't for "that 1%", America would be one lousy place of no luxury, no aspirations to make it to the 1%, no hiring of 'normal people,' ...
awful

Ed Bonderenka said...

I'm sorry, I normally read all the comments before joining in, but not enough time tonight.
If it's been said, forgive me, but I don't believe O'Reilly asked about the usurpation of power, tweaking Obamacare without congressional action for one, when Obama brought that up.

Impertinent said...

@Z:


How was that cynical? It's quite certainly, the truth.

Impertinent said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mustang said...

I would like to observe that liberal man does for Obama, what Monica did for Clinton …

Duckys here said...

no hiring of 'normal people,' ...

----
Huh?

Is this that "rich people gave me a job" silliness.

This class collaboration needs to stop.

Kid said...

Performing the same experiment (interviewing obama), expecting different results is a sign of ?

Sorry Z, It's all a waste of time unless obama is on trial for grievous crimes against America, starting with falsifying his life story(or going along with the lie), and proceeding to giving away Trillions to union bosses (Illinois politicians have been jailed for less) and right through defying the constitution.

IF we had checks and balances. IF we had an opposition party, maybe some of this would have come to pass.

Kid said...

Mustang, I'm sure liberal man dreams of doing so. I've met a bunch of them.

Here's a true funny. There was a homosexual kid working in the local Bravo when obama first was elected. Every time obama came on TV, the kid would look up at the TV, and you could literally read his mind. He was thinking "Hmm, what's the boy genius up to now..."

Anyway, I and friends were sitting at the bar ordering lunch, and this kid wasn't there yet. Late. obama was on TV giving a speech. The restaurant manager was like 3 people away on the phone with this kid who was calling in to explain he would be late. The manager literally said "OK, as soon as you've finished masturbating to obama on the TV get down here. If it takes more than 20 minutes don't bother." We howled.

Z said...

Ducky..wait.. who do you THINK's employing America, the poor?
It can't ALWAYS be the government, Ducky. That just won't work.

Imp.." Keep the 1% satisified" sounded a little like dissing the 1%..sorry, if you didn't mean that.

Mustang; EXCELLENT comparison there :-)

Kid, you MUST have howled! HILARIOUS. Maybe it WAS "Liberalman!" :-)

JonBerg said...

Pris..

"To my mind, comparing a big traffic jam to four Americans murdered, is ridiculous."


Once again PERFICT !!! Nuff said.

Z said...

JonBerg...Pris is 100% right, isn't she.

But Christie's not a fave of mine and I DO think he's a New Jersey thug every bit as much as Obama's a Chicago politico; neither are to be admired.

Ducky: By the way, tell us what you think O'Reilly should have asked Obama and whether or not you think Obama really didn't think he'd be asked about those things...

Kid said...

Z, christie is for gun control and national health care. he's nothing more than a larger whiter shade of pale version of obama.

Kid said...

I think people like o'reilly help validate obama to his adoring fans by not bringing anything substantial and not pressing anything. It's an impossible situation. obama's not going to appear if he doesn't know what the questions are. any surprise question will be edited out.

It's a dog and muslim pig show. Waste of time, and agian, only serves to prop obama up.

the left comes away thinking, we'll the right threw everything they had at him and nothing stuck.

It's insulting beyond description beside everything else.

DaBlade said...

Just more fluff from "Beltway Schmo". Not even a smidgen of truth from Obamster.

Z said...

what's sad is I keep asking the lefties here "WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE ASKED OBAMA?"
and all they can do is insult O'Reilly.

says a lot, doesn't it.