Commentary Magazine


Contentions

Where’s Steve Kroft When You Need Him?

In his State of the Union address last night, President Obama spent much of the early part of his speech savaging the idea of sequestration. In his typically understated way, Mr. Obama referred to the sequester cuts as “sudden, harsh, and arbitrary.” In case he wasn’t clear, Obama also referred to them as “reckless.” And just in case this indictment was too vague, the president said the sequester was a “really bad idea.” 

Which makes this interview between Fox News’ Bret Baier and White House press secretary Jay Carney so delicious. Under Baier’s firm, skillful questioning, Carney is forced to admit that yes, that really bad, terrible, awful, reckless, harsh, vicious, offense-against-God-and-Man idea was … the president’s.  

How terribly inconvenient for Mr. Carney.

What is also worth noting isn’t simply the admission by Carney, but his petulance. The former-Time-journalist-turned-Obama-mouthpiece is clearly very unhappy to be pressed on this matter. Because Mr. Carney, like the president, seems to believe that tough, direct, and respectful questions are a violation of journalist ethics in the age of Obama.

You can just imagine what’s going through Carney’s mind during the Baier interview: Where is Steve Kroft when you need him?

This of course explains why the White House, and the president in particular, has obsessed about Fox News and targeted it so often (full disclosure: I appear on Special Report w/ Bret Baier from time to time). Mr. Obama seems to believe that being cosseted by the press is a basic human right, at least when it comes to him. And given how he’s treated by so much of the press corps, I can understand why.

Introducing Commentary Complete

16 Responses to “Where’s Steve Kroft When You Need Him?”

  1. Ed_Zuckerbrod says:

    The fawning press coverage of the president guarantees that "flip-flopping" is a disease that can only afflict Republicans. Insulation from any charges of hypocrisy has been a great political gift to the Obama administration; it's allowed them to turn on a dime, even support and extend Bush policies without serious criticism. n nA little of Obama's brazenness would have done Mitt Romney a world of good. For fear of negative comparisons to his Massachussets health care initiative, Romney shied away from aggressively attacking Obamacare as the job killing brake on our economy that it undoubtedly is. That's a major reason why Mitt himself is currently unemployed.

    • yamama says:

      Romney was wayy too nice. It just doesnt work with this regime, you have to fight fire with fire.

      • charleston says:

        you have to campaign like you want to win n nallowing Obama to get away with lies and more lies is a BETRAYAL of the American people, and the more I think about it n nthat is what Romney did, with his mistaken notion that politics is a place where pointing out your opponents record, and history is somehow bad form n nRomney was unsuited to be president…. n n

      • rulieg says:

        no, Romney was beautifully suited to be president. he was unsuited to be a CANDIDATE for president. n nand while Romney could certainly have been more forceful, it's pretty clear that the MSM was not going to let anybody get in the way of their boy Barack. look at debate #2! Candy Crowley saved Obama, and I do not doubt that she would have done it again if she'd had to. n nlet's face it: we all knew these guys were playing Chicago rules. but I don't think we really realized how shameless they were until they put out the ad about Romney killing someone's wife. if the MSM was going to allow that, it was going to allow anything. and it did.

      • charleston says:

        I was thinking about his unsuitability as you write n nbut I think,as president, he would probably have been too nice to the Chinese or Iranians, or wherever he should have been tough n nanyway, it's all moot now n nwe are sunk

  2. Don L says:

    T'is but sinful to speak so unworthy of the faux messiah. Only an Obamaheretic wouldest suppose that ancient lady, Truth, has any rights to be heard after she has been aborted so well by the messiah and his hosts of dark angels in his media.

  3. skylarkva says:

    Gotta love the way raving hypocrite Carney castigates Republicans for agreeing with Obama's sequestration scheme. All the while lying libs, aided and abetted by a complicit main stream media, paint Republicans as obstructionists.

  4. HillelA says:

    Of course, sequestration would not even be on the table if the GOP wasn't playing blackmail with the debt ceiling. n nAnd I love how Carney is derisively referred to as "Obama's mouthpiece," as if his position differed from all the press secretaries who've come before. n nAll in all, a "fair and balanced" post in the Fox News tradition.

    • cheeflo says:

      Actually, the sequestration was more like blackmail — the Republicans called his bluff. It's the price Obama paid for his blank check and now it's come back to haunt him.

      • rulieg says:

        anybody remember Obama's dismissive "[sequestration's] not gonna happen" during the debates? it was Obama's poison pill. but if "Hillel" is an example of the average American's thinking pattern, they'll be blaming the Republicans anyway. n nis there ANYTHING that's Obama's fault? or is it only the good stuff that he's responsible for?

      • mike_ste says:

        what good stuff?

    • nvkma says:

      Since apparently you don’t care about the debt ceiling or think that the rate at which our government is spending borrowed money is a serious problem, it would be interesting to know how old you are, in the spirit of “full disclosure.” For example, if you are seventy or older and have no children, I guess I could understand somebody not caring what happens to our country after you die, although that is still a pretty miserable attitude.

    • Doc_Samson says:

      Sounds like somebody is mad that a Fox newsman was able to corner ol' Weasel Jay and actually force the truth from his cold, dead lips. Weren't you just ridiculing conservatives for wanting some "transparency" from the administration on Benghazi, too? What do you have against the truth, Hillel?

    • GangOfOne says:

      Nobody is buying your [and the Admin's] Bolshevik, Hillel, but thank you for playing.

  5. itsy_bitsy says:

    Kudos Baier! At least we still have one "honest" news source! The rest of media obediently turn out "happy" mush, which keeps them in Obama (and Carney's) good graces! Obama media is all about fronting for him and keeping submerged the crap he and his underlings turn out!

  6. mike_ste says:

    As PJ O'Rourke put it: "The Parliament of Whores is us." Our fellow Americans are responsible for this self-righteous, petulant, patronizing President. He knows his supporters are uninterested in the truth (if they are even capable of understanding it – many aren't). That's the sort of funny thing about these kinds of statements by Obama – they reveal a total lack of respect for the very people who voted for him and cheer every idiotic, hypocritical comment he makes. (And of course he's right to have no respect for such fools.) He knows what he's dealing with, every bit as much as we do.

Leave a Reply