PDA

View Full Version : HuffPo Reporter at Presidential Press Conference




Knightskye
02-09-2009, 07:40 PM
I've never seen a blogger at one of Bush's press conferences.

"Sam Stein" just asked a question about prosecuting members of the Bush administration.

And once again Obama is "more interested in looking forward".

BIG_J
02-09-2009, 07:41 PM
lol...Where's he DailyPaul reporter?

MRoCkEd
02-09-2009, 07:46 PM
lol...Where's he DailyPaul reporter?

lol

HOLLYWOOD
02-09-2009, 08:03 PM
CHANGE!

Blah Blah Blah... which equates to: We watchout for one another, not what the laws or Constitution may state.

Yotta Yotta Yotta.... CHANGE

Knightskye
02-09-2009, 08:08 PM
lol...Where's he DailyPaul reporter?

Probably could. Or a blog friendly to our ideals. Why not.

Imperial
02-09-2009, 08:22 PM
I'd say Reason, but Obama probably wouldn't let them in. You have to control the opposition after all.

Jeremy
02-09-2009, 08:24 PM
That's like asking Himmler to prosecute Hitler.

Knightskye
02-09-2009, 11:10 PM
I'd say Reason, but Obama probably wouldn't let them in. You have to control the opposition after all.

He let FOX News in. I tuned in late, but at least two people from FOX News asked questions.

Besides, Reason's people are friendly.

I sent an e-mail to Matt Welch (Reason's editor-in-chief) asking if anyone at Reason would go in the future.

UtahApocalypse
02-09-2009, 11:54 PM
I've never seen a blogger at one of Bush's press conferences.

"Sam Stein" just asked a question about prosecuting members of the Bush administration.

And once again Obama is "more interested in looking forward".

Just was watching the reply.....

Your answer quote is WAY out of context. that was one sentence of about a 3 paragraph answer. That was the ONLY sentence where he implied dooing nothing. the rest of it was saying he had not read the proposal, but would support legal action if any laws were violated.

The reason I replied is not that I support Obama. I don't support outright twisting of words though. Remember Ron Paul said 'We were at fault for 9/11' this is the same exact type of trickery your trying by picking just one sentence to make President Obama look bad.

We are above those types of petty games as Liberty Supporters (or should be.) I have no issue pointing out facts, giving the whole story and using logic to show the flaws in the Obama administration and policies. I however must completely disagree with using smear tactics, and punch line quotes that are inaccurate.

maqsur
02-09-2009, 11:59 PM
Proof that Obama is more of the same: Helen Thomas: "Do you know of any country in the middle east with nuclear weapons?" Obama: "I don't want to speculate, but blah blah blah..." Typical politician bullshit.

Knightskye
02-10-2009, 03:05 PM
Just was watching the reply.....

Your answer quote is WAY out of context. that was one sentence of about a 3 paragraph answer. That was the ONLY sentence where he implied doing nothing. the rest of it was saying he had not read the proposal, but would support legal action if any laws were violated.


I haven't seen the proposal, so I don't want to express an opinion on something that I haven't seen.

What I have said is that my administration is going to operate in a way that leaves no doubt that we do not torture, that we abide by the Geneva Conventions, and that we observe our traditions of rule of law and due process as we are vigorously going after terrorists that can do us harm. And I don't think those are contradictory; I think they are potentially complementary.

My view is also that nobody's above the law, and if there are clear instances of wrongdoing, that people should be prosecuted just like any ordinary citizen. But that generally speaking, I'm more interested in looking forward than I am in looking backwards. I want to pull everybody together, including, by the way, the -- all the members of the intelligence community who have done things the right way and have been working hard to protect America, and I think sometimes are painted with a broad brush, without adequate information.

So I will take a look at Senator Leahy's proposal, but my general orientation is to say let's get it right moving forward.

Two "going forward"s.

By the way, I got the transcript from here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/09/us/politics/09text-obama.html?_r=1&pagewanted=12
First paragraph's on the bottom of page 12, and the next two are on page 13.


The reason I replied is not that I support Obama. I don't support outright twisting of words though. Remember Ron Paul said 'We were at fault for 9/11' this is the same exact type of trickery your trying by picking just one sentence to make President Obama look bad.

Ron Paul said this:

No. Non-intervention was a major contributing factor. Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we've been over there; we've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East -- I think Reagan was right.

We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. So right now we're building an embassy in Iraq that's bigger than the Vatican. We're building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting. We need to look at what we do from the perspective of what would happen if somebody else did it to us.

and this:

I'm suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it, and they are delighted that we're over there because Osama bin Laden has said, "I am glad you're over on our sand because we can target you so much easier." They have already now since that time -- (bell rings) -- have killed 3,400 of our men, and I don't think it was necessary.

It is not the same type of trickery.