Hypocrisy (Warning--Health Care Thread)--updated

Baier interrupts with BAIER: I know.

OBAMA: I could read the exact same e-mail —

Again Baier interrupts: BAIER: These are people. It's not just Washington punditry.

OBAMA: I've got the exact same e-mails, that I could show you, that talk about why haven't we done something to make sure that I, a small business person, am getting as good a deal as members of Congress are getting, and don't have my insurance rates jacked up 40 percent? Why is it that I, a mother with a child with a preexisting condition, still can't get insurance?

So the issue that I'm concerned about is whether not we're fixing a broken system.

Which is an issue everyone is concerned about; however, it does not answer the question.  (But it begs the different question that if we are actually fixing a broken system why all the chicanery to pass the bill; shouldn't it stand on its own merits?)

My interpretation of that exchange: Baier tries to intimidate with large numbers of people upset with pending health care legislation. . . .

Possibly, or possibly he is showing the basis for why he is asking the specific question that is continually avoided. 

. . . . Obama counters with two-times the number in support of his side. . . . .

Actually, he doesn't.  He counters with two time the number of e-mails without specifying whether they support the bill or not.  (And, I would like to point out that Baier never specified the support/non-support content of his e-mails either.  My personal bet is that both of them are receiving a mixed bag and picking out the ones they want.)  The support/non-support levels are probably fairly even, but without an actual majority of the population being in favor (based on recent news--link). 

. . . Baier now tries to defend his now smaller number of emails with a sympathy cry:  "But these are real people with fears!"  Obama counters with his even bigger sympathy retort with: "These are real people with real problems."

. . . The fox reporter was looking for the President to contradict himself (and later have his fellow talking heads to scream about how weak he is and a flip-flopper) and the President deflected those attempts by not directly answering the questions while still making the points that he wanted to make.

He might have been looking for the President to contradict himself, but unless the President has previously stated that the use of this approach is unacceptable answering the question would not be a contradiction.  And, if the President is on record about this procedure not being a legitimate tactic, then allowing it to be used is just as hypocritical as openly supporting its use.  The only difference is that avoiding the question adds a lack of integrity layer on top of the hypocrisy pile.

Reporter and new channel's thinking: Lets ask the President questions about legislative procedures that have existed forever and have been used by both parties. After he/she answers, lets attack same procedures in attempt to discredit legislation. If president doesnt follow our script lets attack president.

Probably.  (It worked for the last eight years with different players, why stop now?)

When I scroll quickly pass your sig line, my mind always interprets it to read: Too close for submissives, I'm switching to nuns!

That works too.

The fox reporter was looking for the President to contradict himself (and later have his fellow talking heads to scream about how weak he is and a flip-flopper)..

I don't doubt that people like Beck, Hannity, and O'Reilly were just waiting for him to say something they could hammer him on. However...

and the President deflected those attempts by not directly answering the questions while still making the points that he wanted to make.

If there was nothing shady going on here then sharing the facts, explaining what they are trying to pass, and answering the questions would gain them support. Don't you think it's a little worrying that they're being so vague and dodging all questions and criticisms, especially on something this important?

Reporter and new channel's thinking: Lets ask the President questions about legislative procedures that have existed forever and have been used by both parties. After he/she answers, lets attack same procedures in attempt to discredit legislation. If president doesnt follow our script lets attack president.