You know Ed Henry, the smug, supercilious, snide and superficial White House newsman for CNN. He had nothing good to say about Barack Obama during the 2008 Presidential campaign, and he's had nothing good to say about him or his administration ever since. Henry has about as much fairness and balance as Rush Limbaugh, and about as little style and grace as the Rushinator as well.
But at President Obama's March 24 news conference, Ed Henry even outdid himself. He had already asked a rather-insulting question, about why our new President is alleged to have sat on the news from his Treasury Secretary about those AIG bonuses for a couple of days. Our new president answered Henry much more fully and fairly than the question deserved. But that answer wasn't good enough for Ed Henry, no, he had to rephrase the question slightly and ask it again. The President then fired back with a really-brilliant riposte, to the effect that the reason he waited slightly before commenting on the AIG bonuses was that he preferred to know what he was talking about. President Obama might well have added that knowing what he was talking about (or asking about) was more than one could say for Ed Henry – that might have been unkind, but would have been well-deserved.
After the Obama news conference ended, the usual cast of CNN talking heads had a field day with the President's response to Ed Henry's asinine questions. Several of them took President Obama's riposte as a sign of Armageddon, stating that the President had now shown his impatience, anger, testiness, and so on – as if they had found some kind of Achilles heel. Too bad they did not follow the President's lead and think about what they were saying. But then, that would be too much to expect.
These critical comments came from the same CNN commentators who, in the past, had criticized President Obama for his alleged "lack of passion." They appear unable to understand that Obama is one of those people who can actually control their responses and behave professionally – which is much more than can be said for either the CNN talking heads, or, particularly, Ed Henry. If Henry likes baiting the President so much, he ought to take up fishing. If he did so, and left journalism behind, it could only improve CNN and the field.
1
1
