President Obama's in his element here.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/obam...4d2e0bafb5

Quote:President Barack Obama took shots at the Republican presidential candidates who have accused him of being weak on foreign policy, telling supporters on Monday that the GOP’s criticisms are unfounded because they “can’t handle a bunch of CNBC moderators,” referencing their outrage over last week’s CNBC Republican debate.

"Let me tell you, if you can’t handle those guys, then I don’t think the Chinese and the Russians are going to be too worried," he said at a Democratic fundraiser in New York.

Keeping with his more laid-back demeanor in recent months, Obama again skewered his Republican opponents, bringing back some favorite jabs he has deployed at previous Democratic fundraisers, like critiquing the GOP’s constant “grumpiness” over any of his policies and how “they occupy a different reality.”

On Monday, he took specific aim at climate-change deniers, calling the time when Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) brought a snowball onto the Senate floor to attempt to disprove the existence of climate change “cray.”

“I’m not making that up. That’s what happened. That’s crazy. I was going to quote Kanye [West], but this is a family audience. But that's cray,” he said to laughter from the audience.

He also described Democrats as people who “try to base our analysis on facts and reason,” skewering Republicans for dismissing the overwhelming scientific consensus on climate change.

“If you go to 100 doctors, and 99 of them tell you have diabetes, you wouldn’t say, ‘Ah, that’s a conspiracy. All 99 doctors got together with Obama to keep me from having bacon and donuts,’” he joked. “You wouldn’t do that.”

Heh, as if they're worried about Obama.

They seemed to handle CNBC just fine. The moderators left with their tails between their legs and egg on their face. The debate had no substance and CNBC was the loser.

(11-03-2015 10:10 AM)Smaug Wrote:  Heh, as if they're worried about Obama.

Obama hasn't been asked a difficult question from the media in 7 years.

Good line - will resonate with a lot of people. Republicans here can try to laugh or meme it off, but it reminds me of the Lloyd Bentsen put down of Dan Quayle ("You're no Jack Kennedy). Of course that didn't help Dukakis-Bentsen win but it did pretty much kill Quayle's political career.

The bottom line is if the Republicans continue to ***** and moan about the moderators (or the media in general), they're going to start looking real weak. In fact, there is a real opportunity for one of the candidates to say something along the lines of 'I'm not going to worry about the media/moderators, I'm more focused on the economy or foreign affairs.

Wanting to debate issues at a debate instead of contending with "journalistic" sniping. Novel concept.

Obama can't handle D'Souza so he prosecuted him. He didn't like the documentary he did on Obama.
It must have hit a little too close to home.

There is a precedent for this:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2009/06/18/...again.html

Quote:Speaking on NBC Tuesday, the president said this:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: First of all, I've got one television station that is entirely devoted to attacking my administration. I mean, that's a pretty...

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I assume you're talking about FOX.

OBAMA: Well, that's a pretty big megaphone. And you'd be hard-pressed if you watched the entire day to — to find a positive story about me on that front.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/10/...ews-again/

Quote:President Barack Obama took a shot at Fox News during a speech on the economy Thursday.

The president was saying the economy is stronger than before he took office, and so Republicans have less to complain about.

“There’s a reason fewer Republicans are preaching doom on the deficits – it’s because the deficits have come down at almost a record pace and they’re now manageable,” Obama said. “There’s a reason fewer Republicans, you hear them running around about Obamacare – because while good, affordable health care might seem like a fanged threat to the freedom of the American people on Fox News, it turns out it’s working pretty well in the real world.”

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/...san-media/

Quote:In an interview with Vox’s Ezra Klein, President Obama complained about the partisan nature of old media outlets including MSNBC and Fox News and pointed out the benefits of bypassing them in favor of new media.

Obama blamed partisan news outlets for feeding the political divide in the country.

“The balkanization of the media means that we just don’t have a common place where we get common facts and a common worldview the way we did 20, 30 years ago,” he said. “And that just keeps on accelerating, you know.”

Obama cited the “Fox News/Rush Limbaugh folks” on the right and the “MSNBC folks” on the left.

Obama couldn't handle Fox News and he couldn't handle ISIS. Or Putin. Or Iran.

(11-03-2015 10:40 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Good line - will resonate with a lot of people. Republicans here can try to laugh or meme it off, but it reminds me of the Lloyd Bentsen put down of Dan Quayle ("You're no Jack Kennedy). Of course that didn't help Dukakis-Bentsen win but it did pretty much kill Quayle's political career.

The bottom line is if the Republicans continue to ***** and moan about the moderators (or the media in general), they're going to start looking real weak. In fact, there is a real opportunity for one of the candidates to say something along the lines of 'I'm not going to worry about the media/moderators, I'm more focused on the economy or foreign affairs.

Meh, I don't see it as a problem for the Republicans. As a whole our nation is a collection of sheep. There could be a video of one of the candidates robbing a bank and Republicans and Democrat voters alike would not vote for the other candidate.

The make or break point for both parties is whether their constituency gets to the voting both. The Republicans are banking that this attack on the moderators will get their people to vote.

(11-03-2015 10:47 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  Obama couldn't handle Fox News and he couldn't handle ISIS. Or Putin. Or Iran.

And now we can close the thread on Kenyan Barry's failed attempt at humor.

Quote:This is my last election ... After my election I have more flexibility

to grab my ankles.

(11-03-2015 10:47 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Obama can't handle D'Souza so he prosecuted him. He didn't like the documentary he did on Obama.
It must have hit a little too close to home.

Yes or no, did D'Souza commit a crime?

Joke of a man, if we can even call him that.

(11-03-2015 10:23 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  They seemed to handle CNBC just fine. The moderators left with their tails between their legs and egg on their face. The debate had no substance and CNBC was the loser.

Yeah right. And that's why they are asking for new debate demands?

(11-03-2015 11:41 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-03-2015 10:23 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  They seemed to handle CNBC just fine. The moderators left with their tails between their legs and egg on their face. The debate had no substance and CNBC was the loser.

Yeah right. And that's why they are asking for new debate demands?

Just because you can handle a root canal, does that mean you should WANT another one?

(11-03-2015 11:42 AM)ECUGrad07 Wrote:  

(11-03-2015 11:41 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-03-2015 10:23 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  They seemed to handle CNBC just fine. The moderators left with their tails between their legs and egg on their face. The debate had no substance and CNBC was the loser.

Yeah right. And that's why they are asking for new debate demands?

Just because you can handle a root canal, does that mean you should WANT another one?

If being president meant you could pick and choose which foreign leaders you want to deal with, I would agree with you.

Obummer couldnt even handle Putin's jockstrap. What a joke of a President we have.

(11-03-2015 11:41 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-03-2015 10:23 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  They seemed to handle CNBC just fine. The moderators left with their tails between their legs and egg on their face. The debate had no substance and CNBC was the loser.

Yeah right. And that's why they are asking for new debate demands?

Depends on the candidate, really. They all have their demands. The goal should be substantive discussion on policy. In order for that to happen, the need to cut the field to 4 or 5. Next week's debate would have 8 if they follow their guidelines as Kasich and Christie have fallen below 2.5%. Let's see if they hold to that.